Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Vikash Chaudhary vs Govt. Of Nctd on 11 September, 2015
OA 4557-14 1 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
PRINCIPAL BENCH
O.A.NO. 4557 OF 2014
New Delhi, this the 11th day of September, 2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
&
HON'BLE SHRI RAJ VIR SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
............
Vikash Chaudhary,
Aged 35 years,
S/o Sh. D.S.Chaudhary,
R/o GH-4/100, Meera Apartments,
Paschim Vihar,
Delhil 63 ........ Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr.S.N.Sharma)
Vs.
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
through the Chief Secretary,
5th Floor, Delhi Sachivalaya,
New Delhi
2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board,
through its Chairman,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
F-18, Karkardooma,
Institutional Area,
Delhi 92
3. Transport Department,
through its Commissioner,
Page 1 of 12
OA 4557-14 2 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors
(GNCT of Delhi),
5/9, Under Hill Road,
Rajpur Road,
Delhi 54 .......... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr.Amit Anand)
.........
ORDER
RAJ VIR SHARMA, MEMBER(J):
In response to Advertisement No.02/2012, vide Post Code 21/12(Annexure A/2), issued by Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (hereinafter referred to as 'DSSSB'), inviting applications from eligible persons desirous of participating in the selection process for filling 24 vacancies in the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector, Transport Department, GNCT of Delhi, the applicant submitted his application in person by the closing date for receipt of applications, i.e., 15.5.2012. In the month of August, 2014, DSSSB published a list of candidates (Annexure A/3), who had applied for the said post, wherein the applicant's name figured against I.D.No.2291150. DSSSB issued a notification (Annexure A/4) scheduling 28.12.2014 and 10.30 A.M. to 12.30 P.M. as the date and time of written examination for the said post, but admit card was not issued to him to appear at the said examination, although such admit cards were issued to other candidates. No intimation rejecting his candidature for the said post was ever issued to him by DSSSB. Therefore, he filed the present O.A. on 19.12.2014 seeking the following reliefs:
Page 2 of 12
OA 4557-14 3 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors "(a) Declare that the DSSSB has wrongly denied consideration of applicant's candidature to the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector in Transport, GNCT of Delhi (post code 21/12)(Advt.No.2/12) and
(b) direct the respondents to consider the applicant's candidature for appointment to the said post and appoint him to the same in accordance with merit position with all consequential benefits.
(c) award costs of the proceedings and
(d) pass any other order/direction which this Hon'ble
Tribunal deems fit and proper in favour of the applicant and against the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case."
He also prayed for the following interim relief:
" Pending decision in OA, this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly direct the respondents to allow the applicant to appear and participate in the selection process for the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector, post code (21/12) and issue him admit card and roll number provisionally towards the written examination scheduled to be conducted on 28.12.2014 (or on any other date, if the examination gets deferred/rescheduled) by way of an ex parte interim order."
2. The Tribunal, vide order dated 22.12.2014, while directing issuance of notices to the respondents, ordered as an ad interim measure that the applicant shall be permitted to appear in the examination provisionally subject to outcome of the O.A.
3. Opposing the O.A., the respondents have filed a counter reply. It is stated by the respondents that a notice dated 16.9.2014 was issued by DSSSB informing the candidates of Post Code 21/12 and other Post Codes of Advertisement No.02/2012 that the examinations for the said Post Codes were likely to be held shortly. Since DSSSB switched over to Online Application Registration System (OARS), the applicants for the said Post Page 3 of 12 OA 4557-14 4 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors Codes, who had applied through paper based form, had to register themselves in OARS and upload their photographs, signatures and educational qualification/experience on the website of DSSSB for issuance of admit cards through OARS. It was also stipulated therein that the applicants, who failed to register in OARS would not be issued admit cards. OARS registration was open with effect from 9.9.2014 to 15.10.2014. The last date for uploading the requisite particulars on DSSSB's website was extended up to 21.10.2014 (till 5.00 P.M.), vide notice dated 13.10.2014, and was again extended up to 3.11.2014 (till 5 P.M.), vide notice dated 21.10.2014. A helpdesk was also set up at DSSSB's office premises, and the candidates were informed to contact the helpdesk on any working day between 2.30 P.M. and 5.30 P.M. As the applicant did not follow the prescribed procedure for registering himself in OARS, E-Admit Card was not generated and downloaded by him.
4. Refuting the respondents' stand, the applicant has filed a rejoinder reply, wherein, besides reiterating more or less same averments as in his O.A., he has stated that no notice or intimation regarding introduction of the OARS was ever given to him by DSSSB.
5. We have perused the records and have heard Mr.S.N.Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, and Mr.Amit Anand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
6. In support of the case of the applicant, Mr.S.N.Sharma, learned counsel, placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in Rinku Kumar v. Page 4 of 12
OA 4557-14 5 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors Government of NCTD and others, OA No.4118 of 2012, decided on 18.3.2014.
7. In support of the statements made by the respondents in their counter reply, Mr.Amit Anand, learned counsel, produced copies of the clippings of newspapers, namely, 'Hindustan Times' dated 9.10.2014, 'Hindustan Times' dated 13.10.2014, 'The Indian Express' dated 22.10.2014.
8. In Rinku Kumar's case(supra), the applicant was a candidate for the post of Head Constable (Asstt.Wireless/Tele Printer Operator) in Delhi Police. As per the results of physical endurance and measurement tests, written examination, and trade test, the applicant was declared qualified for typing test in computer. Due to non-receipt of call letter/admit card by him to appear for the typing test in computer, the applicant could not appear for the said test. The respondents took the plea that besides despatching admit cards to all the candidates, who were declared qualified to appear for the typing test in computer, they had also uploaded the information about the date of typing test on their website. The Tribunal found that the respondents could not bring to force any concrete evidence to show that the call letter had been despatched to the applicant at the address given by him in the application form. The Tribunal also found that once the respondents stipulated that besides the intimation about the selection process being available on the website, the intimation regarding the typing test in computer was required to be given by post, their plea that the applicant had Page 5 of 12 OA 4557-14 6 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors alternate means to know about the date of the typing test was untenable. On these findings, and considering the fact that the typing test is a sort of skill test, and even if it is taken at different points of time, there would be no skewed comparison between the applicant and those who took the test on 20.11.2012, the Tribunal allowed the O.A. and directed the respondents to take the typing test of the applicant within the time stipulated in the order.
9. In the instant case, when Advertisement No.02/2012, Post Code 21/12, was issued by DSSSB, the OARS was not introduced by DSSSB. Therefore, the eligible persons, who were desirous of participating in the selection process, were required to submit their applications on paper based form either in person or by post. On receipt of such applications, DSSSB published a list of candidates, with their ID Nos., in August 2014. On introduction of OARS, DSSSB, vide office notices dated 12.8.2014 and 16.9.2014, which were uploaded on its website, informed those candidates, who had applied for the post on paper based form, to fill the requisite particulars in OARS and upload their recent photographs and signatures on the website of the DSSSB, i.e., www.dsssbonline.nic.in. The said office notices dated 12.8.2014 and 16.9.2014 were not individually sent to those candidates. Further, with a view to give wide publicity to the information requiring those candidates to fill the requisite particulars in OARS and upload their recent photographs and signatures on its website, DSSSB published its notices dated 7.10.2014, 13.10.2014, and 21.10.2014 in the national dailies and extended the date on each of the occasions to enable Page 6 of 12 OA 4557-14 7 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors those candidates to do the needful. The notice dated 7.10.2014 published in 'Hindustan Times' on 9.10.2014; the notice dated 13.10.2014 published in 'Hindustan Times' on 13.10.2014; and the notice dated 21.10.2014 published in 'The Indian Express' on 22.10.2014 are reproduced below:
(i) "GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi 110092 Website: www.dsssb.delhigovt.nic.in Tel: 011 23370237 F.7(5)/DSSSB/Advt./P&P/2012/529 Dated: 07.10.2014 IMPORTANT NOTICE (For candidates of post codes 122/12 to 156/12(PGTs), 48/12, 68/12, 52/12, 157/12(LDCs), 14/12(J.E.E&M) & 21/12 (MVI) of Advt.no.2/12) In the continuation of this office notice dated 12/08/2014 and 16/09/2014 (available on the website of the Board) candidates who applied earlier for any of the aforesaid posts against advt.no.2/2012 in the paper form are hereby once again informed that they have to fill up certain particulars online and upload their recent photograph and signature on the website of the Board www.dsssbonline.nic.in. Details/instructions/Guidelines are available on the website of the Board www.dsssb.delhigovt.nic.in. The last date for uploading the details on OARS is 15.10.2014 and no further opportunity for registration shall be given.
Candidates may note that if he/she fails to upload the above particulars, he/she will be treated as non-interested candidates and his/her candidature shall stand cancelled.
A helpdesk has also been set up at D.S.S.S.B. premises at FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi 110092. Candidates may contact on any working day between 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. Sd/-
(A.K.Yadav) Dy.Secretary (Scrutiny Branch)"
(ii) "GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi 110092 Website: www.dsssb.delhigovt.nic.in Tel: 011 23370237 F.7(5)/DSSSB/Advt./P&P/2012/529 Dated: 13.10.2014 IMPORTANT NOTICE (For candidates of post codes 122/12 to 156/12(PGTs), 48/12, 68/12, 52/12, 157/12(LDCs), 14/12(J.E.E&M) & 21/12 (MVI) of Advt.no.2/12) Page 7 of 12 OA 4557-14 8 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors In the continuation of this office notice dated 12/08/2014 and 07/10/2014 (available on the website of the Board) candidates who applied earlier for any of the aforesaid posts against advt.no.2/2012 in the paper form are hereby once again informed that they have to fill up certain particulars online and upload their recent photograph and signature on the website of the Board www.dsssbonline.nic.in. Details/instructions/Guidelines are available on the website of the Board www.dsssb.delhigovt.nic.in. Now the last date for uploading the details on OARS is 21/10/2014 and no further opportunity for registration shall be given. Candidates may note that if he/she fails to upload the above particulars, he/she will be treated as non-interested candidates and his/her candidature shall stand cancelled.
A helpdesk has also been set up at D.S.S.S.B. premises at FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi 110092. Candidates may contact on any working day between 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. Sd/-
(A.K.Yadav) Dy.Secretary (Scrutiny Branch)"
(iii) "GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi 110092 Website: www.dsssb.delhigovt.nic.in Tel: 011 23370237 F.7(5)/DSSSB/Advt./P&P/2012/572 Dated: 21/10/14 IMPORTANT NOTICE (For candidates of post codes 122/12 to 156/12(PGTs), 48/12, 68/12, 52/12, 157/12(LDCs), 14/12(J.E.E&M) & 21/12 (MVI) of Advt.no.2/12) In the continuation of this office notice dated 12/08/2014, 07.10.2014 and 17/10/2014 (available on the website of the Board) candidates who applied earlier for any of the aforesaid posts against advt.no.2/2012 in the paper form aare hereby once again informed that they have to fill up certain particulars online and upload their recent photograph and signature on the website of the Board www.dsssbonline.nic.in. Details/ instructions/ Guidelines are available on the website of the Board www.dsssb.delhigovt.nic.in.
Now the last date for uploading details on OARS has been extended upto 03/11/2014 (till 5 PM) and no further opportunity for registration shall be given.
Page 8 of 12
OA 4557-14 9 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors Further, there is no change in last date for uploading details on OARS for the post codes - 48/12, 68/12, 52/12, 157/12 (LDCs)(i.e. the registration for these post codes shall close at 5 PM on 21.10.2014) Candidates may note that if he/she fails to upload the above particulars, he/she will be treated as non-interested candidates and his/her candidature shall stand cancelled.
A helpdesk has also been set up at D.S.S.S.B. premises at FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi 110092. Candidates may contact on any working day between 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. Sd/-
(A.K.Yadav) Dy.Secretary (Scrutiny Branch)"
In view of the above notices issued by DSSSB, which were not only uploaded on its website, but also published in the national dailies, we do not find any substance in the contention of the applicant that DSSSB did not give any intimation to him to fill the requisite particulars in OARS and upload his recent photograph and signature on the website of DSSSB, i.e., www.dsssbonline.nic.in. In terms of the said notices, as the applicant failed to fill the necessary particulars in OARS and upload his recent photograph, signature, etc., on the website of the DSSSB, he was treated as a non- interested candidate and his candidature stood cancelled. Thus, he did not have a right to appear in the written examination held for the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector, Transport Department. Furthermore, when he was capable of knowing about the aforesaid Advertisement in May 2012, the list of candidates published in August 2014, and the notification about the date and time of the written examination, he cannot be allowed to take the plea that he did not receive any information from DSSSB or that he did not have any knowledge about the requirement of filling the necessary particulars in Page 9 of 12 OA 4557-14 10 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors OARS and uploading his photograph, signature, etc., on the website of the DSSSB. His conduct rather shows that he failed to fill the necessary particulars in OARS and upload his photograph, signature, etc., on the DSSSB's website due to his sheer negligence and carelessness. In the above view of the matter, it cannot be held that the DSSSB has wrongly denied consideration of the applicant's candidature.
10. The decision of the Tribunal in Rinku Kumar's case(supra), besides being distinguishable on facts, is of no help to the case of the applicant in the present case.
11. In Union Public Service Commission v. GNCTD, WP ( C ) No.10058 of 2009, decided on 25.1.2010, the challenge was to the order of the Tribunal directing the UPSC to consider the candidatures of some applicants even though their Detailed Application Forms (DAFs) were incomplete. The Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held thus:
"25. With such a large number of DAFs having been received by the UPSC, it is impracticable to expect the UPSC to give a goby to the instructions that have categorically and specifically been mentioned in the advertisements issued by it. It is one thing to say that procedure is a handmaid of justice but it is another thing, in practical life, to give procedure a complete go by for the sake of accommodating a few people. If this is done, then there would be no obligation on anybody to follow any procedure resulting in a completely unmanageable situation.
26. If the submission made by learned counsel for the respondents is placed on a larger canvas (since the UPSC conducts dozens of such examinations annually), one can well imagine the resultant chaos. For example, it is well known that the UPSC receives lakhs of applications for the Central Civil Services examination. If every such applicant submits an incomplete application, that is to say that the relevant Page 10 of 12 OA 4557-14 11 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors information is not submitted along with the application, the processing time for the UPSC would take several months and would, in the long run, be completely counterproductive. Consequently, in our opinion while it is true that procedure is the handmaid of justice, it is not possible to ignore practical difficulties that may arise in a given case."
12. In Secretary, Union Public Service Commission and another v. S.Krishna Chaitanya, (2011) 14 SCC 227, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the negligence on the part of the respondent-candidate has resulted into his sufferance and he himself is only to be blamed for the events.
13. In Sachin Kumar Rana v. Union of India and others, W.P. ( C ) No. 7198 of 2014, decided on 17.10.2014, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held that considering the fact that the petitioner failed to complete the application form either due to his carelessness, ignorance or negligence, he has not made out any case for exercise of the writ jurisdiction of the Court.
14. In Shri N.K.Joshi v. Union Public Service Commission, O.A.No.33/2011, decided on 11.1.2011, the Tribunal held thus:
"The Respondent, UPSC has to conduct very large number of examinations, in which millions of candidates appear. It is, therefore, necessary for them to insist that the rules regarding submission of application forms, including their submissions in time, should be followed strictly. If it is not insisted upon, it can lead to sheer administrative chaos. The Tribunal would normally not interfere in such a matter, unless it is demonstrated unambiguously and on the basis of solid facts that the respondent had indulged in serious irregularities. The Applicant has merely given a fanciful account of events without any basis of facts."
15. In Gudipati Gayatri Kashyap, etc., v. The Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, etc., OA No.2767 of 2014 and five connected O.As., decided on 21.11.2014, the Tribunal, after finding that the applicants Page 11 of 12 OA 4557-14 12 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors had not completed and finally submitted Part II of the online applications, held that they could not be treated as candidates for the examination. Accordingly, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the decision of the UPSC holding the applicants as not candidates for the examination. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, upholding the said decision of the Tribunal, dismissed W.P. ( C ) Nos.8319 of 2014 and another connected writ petition, decided on 28.11.2014 (Satish Kumar, etc. v. Union Public Service Commission and another, etc.) filed by the applicant-petitioners.
16. We would also like to observe here that allowing the applicant to appear in the written examination would not only be contrary to the terms and conditions of the aforesaid notices, which are binding on all the candidates and DSSSB as well, but also violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. There might be some other candidates, like the applicant in the present case, whose candidatures stood cancelled. Non-grant of similar opportunity to those candidates would be discriminatory. In the process, the entire gamut of recruitment process for the post in question would become vulnerable.
17. In the light of our above discussions, we hold that the O.A., being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.
18. Resultantly, the O.A. is dismissed. The interim order passed earlier stands vacated. No costs.
(RAJ VIR SHARMA) (SUDHIR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER AN Page 12 of 12 OA 4557-14 13 Vikash Chaudhary v. GNCTD & ors Page 13 of 12