Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Ashok Pratap Singh vs Home Affairs on 29 May, 2025
1
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 2738/2023;
O.A. No. 2815/2023;
O.A. No. 3050/2023;
O.A. No. 0883/2024;
O.A. No. 0175/2024;
O.A. No. 3151/2024;
O.A. No. 3069/2023;
O.A. No. 3631/2023;
O.A. No. 0688/2024;
O.A. No. 0042/2024;
O.A. No. 0993/2024;
O.A. No. 1213/2024;
O.A. No. 1244/2024;
O.A. No. 1344/2024;
O.A. No. 1347/2024;
O.A. No. 1348/2024;
O.A. No. 1356/2024;
O.A. No. 1357/2024;
O.A. No. 1369/2024;
O.A. No. 1389/2024;
O.A. No. 1776/2024;
O.A. No. 1777/2024;
O.A. No. 1778/2024;
O.A. No. 1779/2024;
O.A. No. 1795/2024;
O.A. No. 1796/2024;
O.A. No. 1797/2024;
O.A. No. 1956/2024;
O.A. No. 2729/2023;
O.A. No. 2910/2024;
And
O.A. No. 1212/2024
Reserved on:
on:- 09.05.2025
Pronounced on:
on:- 29.05.2025
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)
O.A. No. 2738/2023
Pravesh Kumar
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Sh.Mohan Lal
2
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
R/o Block E-4,
E House No. 237,
Sultan Puri,
New Delhi-110086
Delhi
Mob.No.9718028071
Post: Statistical Investigator Grade
Grade-II
Group--B
..Applicant
(Through Advocate: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal)
VERSUS
1. Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary
O/o Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
Room No. 303, 3rd Floor,
Janganana Bhawan,
2/A Mansingh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110011
2. Staff Selection Commission (SSC)
Through its Chairman (Headquarter)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
3. The Regional Director
Staff Selection Commission (SSC) (Northern Region)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
4. Union of India
Through its Secretary
Govt. of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
Email: [email protected]
...Respondents
(Through Advocate: Mr. Awanish Kumar)
3
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 2815/2023
Sachin Kumar
Aged about 30 years,
S/o Sh. Prahlad Singh
R/o A--4/74, SF Kh. No. 232,
Rajveer Colony, Gharoli Extension,
Delhi-110096
110096
Mob.No. 9958750501
Post: Statistical Investigator Grade
Grade-II
Group--B
..Applicant
(Through Advocate: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal)
VERSUS
1. Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary
O/o Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
Room No. 303, 3rd Floor,
Janganana Bhawan,
2/A Mansingh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110011
2. Staff Selection Commission (SSC)
Through its Chairman (Headquarter)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
3. The Regional Director
Staff Selection Commission (SSC) (Northern Region)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
4. Union of India
Through its Secretary
Govt. of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Department
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
Email: [email protected]
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Rajpal Singh with
Mr. Ankit Yadav)
4
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 3050/2023
Rahul
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Sh. Uday Kumar Sah
R/o C--19, Street No. 07,
Amar Colony, Nangloi,
Delhi-110041
110041
Mob.No. 8750290699
Post: Statistical Investigator Grade
Grade-II
Group--B
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Anuj Aggarwal)
VERSUS
1. Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary
O/o Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
Room No. 303, 3rd Floor,
Janganana Bhawan,
2/A Mansingh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110011
2. Staff Selection Commission (SSC)
Through its Chairman (Headquarter)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
3. The Regional Director
Staff Selection Commission (SSC) (Northern Region)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
4. Union of India
Through its Secretary
Govt. of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
Email: [email protected]
...Respondents
5
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Vijender Singh)
O.A. No. 883/2024
Rajat Kashyap Kumar
Group 'B'
Aged 35 years
S/o Sh. Satish Kumar,
R/o Q--13, MIG Flats,
Prasad Nagar, New Delhi -110005
110005
9871203193
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary (Home)
North Block,
New Delhi-110001
Delhi
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
4. Staff Selection Commission
Through its Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Rajeev Kumar)
O.A. No. 175/2024
Ashavri Sanon
6
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Aged about 23 years,
D/o Sh. Rajesh Sanon
R/o C--5D, 84C, Janak Puri,
New Delhi-110058
Delhi
Mob.No.9582228583
Post: Statistical Investigator Grade
Grade-II
Group--B
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Anuj Aggarwal)
VERSUS
1. Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary
O/o Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
Room No. 303, 3rd Floor,
Janganana Bhawan,
2/A Mansingh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110011
2. Staff Selection Commission (SSC)
Through its Chairman (Headquarter)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
3. The Regional Director
Staff Selection Commission (SSC) (Northern Region)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
4. Union of India
Through its Secretary
Govt. of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi-110001
110001
Email: [email protected]
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Awnish Kumar)
O.A. No. 3151/2024
Lalit Yadav
Group 'B'
7
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Aged about 25 years
S/o Sh. Satish Yadav
R/o House No. 2688 Street No. 68,
B-Block
Block Sant Nagar Burari
Delhi-110084
110084
Mob- 989603241
Email-- [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary (Home)
North Block,
New Delhi-110001
Delhi
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operation,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar(General)
C-Wing,
Wing, Ground Floor, Pushpa Bhawan,
Madangir Road, New Delhi-110062
Delhi 110062
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Ms. Anupama Bansal)
8
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 3069/2023
Neeraj Kushwaha
Group 'B',
Aged 29 years,
S/o Sh. Arjun Kushwaha,
R/o D--10,
10, Behind Hanuman Mandir,
Ganesh Nagar, Pandav Nagar Complex,
Delhi-110092
110092
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operation,
Ministry
inistry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General
C-Wing,
Wing, Ground Floor, Pushpa Bhawan,
Madangir Road, New Delhi-110062
Delhi 110062
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Dr. C S Khan)
9
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 3631/2023
Vineet Sharma
Group 'B'
Aged 26 years
S/o Sh. Rajeev Sharma,
R/o Near Pugal House,
Old Ginanni, Bikaner,
Rajasthan - 334001
Mob.8955659990
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operation,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Director,
Census House, Plot No. 22,
Edc Complex, Patto,
Panaji, Goa-403001
Goa
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Ms. Annu Singh,
Mr. Subhash Gosain)
10
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 688/2024
Kushagra Arora,
Group 'B'
Aged 23 years
S/o Sh. Kewal Krishan Dang,
R/o Street No. 1, Ambedkar Colony,
Near Shiv Bari Circle, Bikaner
Rajasthan - 334001
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Ram Niwas Buri)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operation,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Director,
Census House, Plot No. 22,
EDC Complex, Patto,
Panaji, Goa-403001
Goa
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Dr. C S Khan,
Mr. Subhash Gosain)
11
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 42/2024
Kuldeep Sagar
Group 'B'
Aged 24 years
S/o Sh. Manik Chand Sagar,
R/o Gali No. 4, Vikas Nagar
Bharatpur Rajasthan-321001
Rajasthan
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General
General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operation,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Director,
CGO Complex,
Himadri Khand, Longwood
Shimla
Shimla-171001
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Dilbagh Singh)
12
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 993/2024
1. Praveen Kumar Sharma
S/o Sh. Satyanarayan Sharma
R/o Ward No. 15, Khari Brahman,
Raghunathgarh, Sikar
Pincode - 332027
(aged about years)
2. Rahul Jangid
S/o Sh. Mohan Lal Jangid
R/o B-22,
B Subhash Colony,
Behind Dinesh Studio Kalwar Road,
Jhotwara, Jaipur
(aged
aged about years)
3. Rakesh Kumar Sharma
S/o Sh. Sitaram Sharma
R/o Shrawan Baba ki Dhani,
Mozya Moad, Post: Mundia Ramsar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302012
(aged about years)
4. Dholya Ram Saini
S/o Sh. Kishori Lal Saini
R/o Khanki Bas, Madhogarh, Alwar,
Rajasthan - 301414
(aged about years)
..Applicants
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Ajesh Luthra with
Ms. Meenu Sharma)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Through its Secretary
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. The Registrar General & Census Commissioner
Room No. 303, 3rd Floor,
Janganana Bhawan,
2/A, Mansingh Road,
New Delhi - 110011
3. Directorate of Census Operation,
(Karnataka), Through its Director
9th& 10th Floor,
13
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Sir M. Visvesvarya Kendriya Bhawan,
No. 806, Old Airport Road,
Near Flyover,
Domlur,Bangalore
Domlur,Bangalore-560071
4. Staff Selection Commission (Hdqrs.)
Through its Chairman,
Block No 12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110504
Delhi 504
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Vijendra Singh)
O.A. No. 1213/2024
Palak Kukkar
Aged around 27 years
D/o Sh. Vinod Kukkar
R/o 97-P
97 Block,Kotwali Road
Sriganganagar, Rajasthan-335001
335001
Mob- 9509959444
Email-- [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Punjab
Ministry of Home Affairs
Janganana Bhawan, Ist Floor
Plot No. 2B, Madhya Marg
Sector
Sector-19A, Chandigarh-160019
160019
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
14
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Rajeev Kumar)
O.A. No. 1244/2024
Niharika
Group 'B'
Aged 33 years
D/o Sh. Ramesh Baboo
R/o E--47
47 A, Flat B2 Chattarpur Ext.
Near Suman Chowk
New Delhi-110074
Delhi
Mob: 8851146071
Email: [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operation,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General,
C-Wing,
Wing, Ground Floor, Pushpa Bhawan,
Madangir Road, New Delhi-110062
Delhi 110062
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
15
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. R S Rana)
O.A. No. 1344/2024
Shahrukh Panwar
aged around 26 years
S/o Sh. Anil Panwar
R/o Street No. 7, Dhobi Talai
Bikaner, Rajasthan-334001
Rajasthan
Mob: 7615000150
Email: [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Maharashtra
Ministry of Home Affairs
Exchange Building, 2nd Floor,
Sir Shivsagar Ramgulam Marg
Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001
400001
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
16
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through
ough Advocate(s): Mr. R V Sinha)
O.A. No. 1347/2024
Purva Bindal
Aged around 27 years
D/o Sh. Lokesh Kumar Bindal
R/o Ward no. 18, Kesavvadi
Near Jain Temple
Tijara
Rajasthan
Rajasthan-301411
Mob: 8302029819
Email: [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Maharashtra
Ministry of Home Affairs
Exchange Building, 2nd Floor,
Sir Shivsagar Ramgulam Marg
Ballard
llard Estate, Mumbai-400001
Mumbai 400001
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
17
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. R V Sinha)
O.A. No. 1348/2024
Khushbu
Aged around 27 years
D/o Sh. Pawan Kumar
R/o Ward No. 11 (New-16)
(New
Near Indian Oil Petrol Pump
Maheshwari Multi Collection
Anupgarh, Sri Ganganagar
Rajasthan
Rajasthan-335701
Mob: 7023392126
70
Email: [email protected]
Currently working as LDC
in the Regional Office of Textile Commissioner
2nd floor, NTC Plaza
Dudheshwar Road
Near Government Litho Press
Dudheshwar Road
Shahibaug, Ahmedabad-380004
Ahmedabad
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Punjab
18
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Ministry of Home Affairs
Janganana Bhawan, IstFloor
Plot No. 2B, Madhya Marg
Sector
ector-19A, Chandigarh-160019
160019
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. R V Sinha)
O.A. No. 1356/2024
Vishal Julaha
Aged around 25 years
S/o Sh. Jugal Kishor
R/o F--121-B, Vallabh Garden
Bikaner, Rajasthan-334001
Rajasthan
Mob: 6378420134
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Punjab
19
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Ministry of Home Affairs
Janganana Bhawan, Ist Floor
Plot No. 2B, Madhya Marg
Sector
Sector-19A, Chandigarh-160019
160019
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Rajeev Kumar)
O.A. No. 1357/2024
Simran Diwan
Aged around 28 years
D/o Sh. Keshav Diwan
R/o Gali No. 8 Ward No. 17
Sant Kripal Nagar
Setia Farm, Sri Ganganagar
Rajasthan
Rajasthan-335001
Mob: 7014634188
Email: [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Punjab
Ministry of Home Affairs
Janganana Bhawan, Ist Floor
20
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Plot No. 2B, Madhya Marg
Sector
Sector-19A, Chandigarh-160019
160019
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodh Road, New Delhi-110003
Lodhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Subhash Gosai)
O.A. No. 1369/2024
Sourabh Mishra
aged around 29 years
S/o Sh. Gajanand Mishra
R/o Singion Ka Chowk
Bada Bazaar, Chippo Ki Masjid ke Samne
Bikaner, Rajasthan-334001
Rajasthan
Mob: 6377691040
Email: [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Assam
Ministry of Home Affairs
Amingaon
Kamrup
Assam
Assam-781031
21
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Ms. Anupama Bansal)
O.A. No. 1389/2024
Ajay Singh
Aged around 27 years
S/o Sh. Girwar Singh
R/o VPO MahalanaUttarada
Tehsil--Rajgarh Distt-Churu
Rajasthan
Rajasthan-331023
Mob: 7976523588
Email: [email protected]
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Tamil Nadu
Ministry of Home Affairs
Rajaji Bhawan, "E" Wing
III Floor, Besant Nagar,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu-
Nadu 600090
22
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): None)
O.A. No. 1776/2024
Rinku Ola
D/o Sh. Ramniwas,
R/o VPO Kankra Barrod,
Tehsil-- Behror, Dist. Alwar,
Rajasthan
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Director of Census Operation,
Directorate of Census Operation,
Gujarat, Govt. Of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Census Bhavan, Sector 10/A,
Gandhinagar
Gandhinagar-382010
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
23
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Jalaj Aggarwal)
O.A. No. 1777/2024
Keshab Singh Gurjar
Aged around 32 years
S/o Sh. Lakhmi Chand
R/o VPO-Mahamadpur
VPO
Teh -Todabhim
Todabhim
Dist -Karauli,
Karauli, Rajasthan-
Rajasthan 322254
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Odisha
Ministry of
o Home Affairs
Janganana Bhawan
Janpath
Unit
Unit-IX, PO: Bhoinagar
Bhubaneswar, Odisha-751022
Odisha 751022
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
24
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Jalaj Aggarwal)
O.A. No. 1778/2024
Nand Kishor Pareek
R/o lndpalsar Sankhlan,
Tehsil-- Sri Dungargarh ,
Dist. Bikaner,
Rajasthan
...Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar
Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Director of Census Operation,
Directorate of Census Operation,
Gujarat, Govt. Of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Census Bhavan, Sector 10/A,
Gandhinagar
Gandhinagar-382010
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Jalaj Aggarwal)
25
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 1779/2024
Sandeep Kumar Meena
Aged around 29 years
S/o Sh. Ramkhilari Meena
R/o Vill: Bhanwarki PO: Sundari
Teh-Bamanwas,
Bamanwas, Distt-Sawai
Distt Sawai Madhopur
Rajasthan
Rajasthan-322214
Mob: 8104642064
Email: [email protected]
Currently residing at:
Plot No. 103
Brij Vihar Colony
Jagatpura
Jaipur, Rajasthan-302017
Rajasthan
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Maharashtra
Ministry of Home Affairs
Exchange Building, 2nd Floor,
Sir Shivsagar Ramgulam Marg
Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001
Mumbai 400001
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
26
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Vijendra Singh)
O.A. No. 1795/2024
Rajesh Kumar Meena
S/o Sh. Kajod Mal Meena,
R/o VPO Bilod,
The Jamwaramgarh , Via Amer ,
Jaipur,
Rajasthan
Rajasthan-302028
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Director of Census Operation,
Directorate of Census Operation,
Tamil Nadu, Govt. Of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Rajaji Bhawan, "E" Wing, III Floor,
Besant Nagar, Chennai-600090,
Chennai 600090,
Tamil Nadu.
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Jalaj Aggarwal)
27
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
O.A. No. 1796/2024
Manoj Chaturvedi
S/o Sh. Vinod Kumar Chaturvedi,
R/o A--266,
266, Bhodi Kothi Market,
Pratap Vihar , Niwaru Link Road,
Jaipur, Rajasthan-302012
Rajasthan
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 0001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Director of Census Operation,
Directorate of Census Operation,
Maharashtra, Govt. Of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs, Exchange Building,
2nd floor, Sir Shivsagar Ramgulam Marg,
Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001
Mumbai 400001
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 0001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Y P Singh)
O.A. No. 1797/2024
Shakti Singh
28
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
S/o Sh.Vijay Singh,
R/o 150, Railway Officer Colony,
Kanakpura, Jhotwara,
Jaipur, Rajasthan
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Director of Census Operation,
Directorate of Census Operation,
Gujarat, Govt. Of India,
Ministry
nistry of Home Affairs,
Census Bhavan, Sector 10/A,
Gandhinagar
Gandhinagar-382010
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Com
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Ms. Seema Grover)
O.A. No. 1956/2024
Ashok Pratap Singh
Aged about 29 years,
S/o Sh. Dinesh Singh
R/o 162/1, Khohar House,
Siddharth Nagar, Satna,
29
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Madhya Pradesh-485005
Pradesh
Mob. No. 8468845068
Post: Statistical Investigator Grade
Grade-II
Group--B
..Applicant
(Through Advocate: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal)
VERSUS
1. Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary
O/o Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
Room No. 303, 3rd Floor,
Janganana Bhawan,
2/A Mansingh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110011
2. Staff Selection Commission (SSC)
Through its Chairman (Headquarter)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
3. The Regional Director
Staff Selection Commission (SSC) (Northern Region)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
4. Union of India
Through
ough its Secretary
Govt. of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
Email: [email protected]
...Respondents
(Through Advocate: Mr. R S Rana)
O.A. No. 2729/2023
Suman Sogan
Aged about 30 years,
D/o· Sh. Mangal Chand Sogan
R/o RZ-439,
RZ 439, C/2 Raj Nagar Part~2,
30
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Palam Colony, New Delhi-110077
Delhi 110077
Mob. No.9990973794
Post: Statistical Investigator Grade
Grade-II
Group--B
...Applicant
(Through Advocate: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal)
VERSUS
1. Ministry of Home Affairs
Through its Secretary
O/o Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
Room No. 303, 3rd Floor,
Janganana Bhawan,
2/A Mansingh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110011
2. Staff Selection Commission (SSC)
Through its Chairman (Headquarter)
Through
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
3. The Regional Director
Staff Selection Commission (SSC) (Northern Region)
Government of India
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
Email: [email protected]
4. Union of India
Through its Secretary
Govt. of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
Email: [email protected]
...Respondents
(Through Advocate: Mr. R S Rana)
O.A. No. 2910/2024
ANJU
Group 'B'
Aged around 28 years
D/o Sh. Sumer Singh
31
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
R/o Flat no. 1, Type III,
DTU, Shahbad Dairy,
Delhi-110042
110042
989603241
..Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations,
Ministry of Home Affairs
Thro
Through Registrar General,
C-Wing,
Wing, Ground Floor,
Pushpa Bhawan,
Madangir Road, New Delhi-110062.
Delhi 110062.
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Secretar
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. R V Sinha)
O.A. No. 1212/2024
Samir
Aged around 25 years
S/o Sh. Anil Kumar Bhamboo
R/o Ward no. 10, 16DPN
VPO- Ramgarh, Tehsil-
Tehsil Nohar,
32
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
Distt: Hanumangarh, Rajasthan-
Rajasthan-335504
Mob: 9521726017
Email: [email protected]
...Applicant
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Setu Niket with
Ms. Esha Mazumdar)
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Ministry of Home Affairs
Through Secretary (Home)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
2. Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Through Registrar General & Census Commissioner,
2A Man Singh Road, New Delhi
Delhi-110001
3. Directorate of Census Operations, Punjab
Ministry of Home Affairs
Janganana Bhawan, Ist Floor
Plot No. 2B, Madhya Marg
Sector
Sector-19A, Chandigarh-160019
160019
4. Union of India,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Through its Secretary (DoPT)
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Delhi 110001
5. Staff Selection Commission
Through Secretary
Block No.12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
Delhi 110003
...Respondents
(Through Advocate(s): Mr. Ashish Rai)
33
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V
V
ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :
"The learning process is something you can incite, literally incite, like a riot. And then, just possibly, it goes home, or on"
on"-
-Audre Lorde All these matters bearing O.A. No. 2738/2023;
O.A. No. 2815/2023; O.A. No. 3050/2023; O.A. No No. 883/2024; O.A. No. 175/2024; O.A. No. 3151/2024;
O.A. No. 3069/2023; O.A. No. 3631/2023; O.A. No. 688/2024; O.A. No. 42/2024; O.A. No. 993/2024; O.A. No. 1213/2024; O.A. No. 1244/2024; O.A. No. 1344/2024; O.A. No. 1347/2024; O.A. No. 1348/2024;
O.A. No. 1356/2024; O.A. No. 1357/2024; O.A. No. 1369/2024; O.A. No. 1389/2024; O.A. No. 1776/2024;
O.A. No. 1777/2024; O.A. No. 1778/2024; O.A. No. 1779/2024; O.A. No. 1795/2024; O.A. No. 1796/2024;
O.A. No. 1797/2024; O.A. No. 1956/2024; O.A. No. 2729/2023; O.A. No. 2910/2024 and O.A. No. 1212/2024 pertain to the post of Statistical Investigator Grade--II, II, where the offers of appointment have been issued to the applicants and canceled later on. Since a common question of facts and law is involved in the present OAs, with the consent of all parties the OAs were being heard together and are being disposed of by this 34 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V common order. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are being extracted extracted primarily from O.A. No. 883/2024 Rajat Kashyap Kumar Vs. UOI & Ors (Rajat Ors).
2. O.A. No. 883/2024 has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs:-
reliefs:
"(i) Quash and set aside the order dated 07.07.2023 2023 issued by Respondent No. 3.
(ii) Pass an order directing the Respondent No. 2 to appoint the applicant to the post of Statistical Investigator Grade-II II in terms of the offer of appointment dated 16.05.2023 wit all consequential benefits including arr arrears of pay, seniority, etc. alongwith interest at 9% p.a. till realization.
(iii) Award cost of the proceedings; and
(iv) Pass any order/relief/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in the favour of the applicant."
2.1. Learned counsel for the applicant(s), Mr. Setu Niket, drew attention to the essential qualificat qualification as mentioned in the notice dated 23.12.2021 pertaining to Statistical Investigator Grade-II, Grade II, which is the bone of contention in present matter. He further drew attention to the 35 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Recruitment Rules notified on 01.10.2019. The relevant R.R.s is hereby extracted extracted from Page 55 of the OA:
OA:-
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
6. 1200*(2019) General Level 6 in Selection
Statistical subject to Central the pay
Investigator variation Service matrix
Grade II dependent Group 'B' Rs.
on workload Non 35400
Gazetted, 112400
Non
Ministerial
(6) (7)
Not exceeding 30 years. Essential:
Note 1: Relaxable for Bachelor degree in any subject with
Government servants upto Statistics as one of the subject from a
five years in accordance recognised University or Institute.
with the instructions or
orders issued by the Note 1: The qualifications are relaxable
Central Government. at the discretion of the Staff Selection
Commission or competent authority, for Note 2: The crucial date reasons to be recorded in writing, in for determining the age case of candidates otherwise well limit shall be the closing clos qualified.
date for receipt of
applications from Note 2: The qualification regarding
candidates and not the experience is rrelaxable at the discretion closing date prescribed for of the Staff Selection Commission or those in Assam, competent authority, for reasons to be Meghalaya, Arunachal recorded in writing in the case of Pradesh, Meram, candidates belonging to the Scheduled Manipur, Nagaland, Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, if at Tripura, Sikkim, Ladakh any stage of Selection the Staff Division of Jammu and Selection Commission or competent Kashmir State, Lahaul authority is of the opinion that sufficient and Spiti district and number of candidates from these Pangi Sub Sub-Division of communities possessing the requisite Chamba district of experience are not likely to be available Himachal Pradesh, to fill up the vacancies reserved for Andaman and Nicobar them Islands and Lakshadweep.
2.2. Mr. Setu Niket, learned counsel for the applicant stated that there is gross violation of principles of nat natural justice on two counts, firstly, firstly, when the cancellation order was issued, no show cause notice was issued, whereas 36 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V offer of appointment was already issued and accepted by the applicant; and secondly, that the impugned order dated 07.07.2023 (Annexure-A/1 (Annexure A/1) is non speaking and a cryptic one, wherein no reason has been given by the respondents, which is extracted herein below:
below:-
"2. All the education certificates/mark sheets and other documents placed in the dossiers sent by SSC to ORGI as well as the document provided by you were examined with reference to the notification of SSC for the post of Statistical Investigator Gr. II and other relevant documents. After due examinat examination of the documents and deliberation for every aspect of the matter, the Committee found that Sh. Rajat Kashyap Kumar does not meet the requirement prescribed in the notification of SSC CGL 2021 for the post of S.I. Gr. II"
2.3. The learned counsel contended contended that the impugned order has been issued by the respondents without application of mind and the committee formed an opinion without any justification, and, in a cryptic manner, declared the applicants as unfit.
2.4. He further drew the attention o of the Bench to a clarification dated 07.10.2019, by the Office of Registrar General of India (ORGI), wherein it is stated that the original requisition was sent in terms of the recruitment rules. He highlighted para 6 and 7 of the said clarification, which reads as under:
under:-
S. Heading of the Relevant details No. schedule
6. Educational & Essential Bachelor degree in any subject 37 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V other with Statistics as one of the subject from a qualifications recognized University or Institute.
required for direct recruits. Note 1: The qualifications are relaxable at the discretion of the SSC of Competent Authority, for reasons to be recorded in writing in case of candidates otherwise well qualified.
Note 2: The qualification regarding experience is relaxable at th the discretion of SSC or Competent Authority, for reasons to be recorded in writing in the case of candidates belonging to the SCs or the STs, if at any stage of Selection the SSC or Competent Authority is of the opinion that sufficient number of candidates from these communities possessing the requisite experience are not likely to be available to fill up the vacancies reserved for them.
7. Method of 70% by direct recruitment recruitment 15% by Limited Departmental Competitive Examination to be conducted b by the Staff Selection commission from amongst Senior Compiler with one one-year regular service in Level-5 5 in the pay matrix Rs. 29200 29200-92300 or Compiler with Six years' regular service in Level-4 4 in the pay matrix Rs. 25500 25500- 81100; or Senior compiler with Six y years combined regular service in the grades of Senior Compiler and Compiler.
15% by promotion failing which by Limited Departmental Competitive Examination.
A clause has been inserted in the said clarification as note '@', which reads as under:
under:-
"@ applicant applicant should have studied the subject of Statistics at Degree level in Part Part-I, Part and Part-III Part-II III or in all the six semesters of three years degree course and not simply a paper in any part of the Degree or Six semesters at degree level."38
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 2.5. Learned counsel contended that according to the respondents it has to be a 'Subject' and not a 'Paper' in the Graduation.
2.6. Learned counsel for the applicant further drew reference to the minutes of the meeting of ORGI held on 31.10.2023, 01.11.2023, 01.11.2023, 06.11.2023, 14.11.2023 and 01.12.2023 and highlighted para 7, which reads as under:
under:-
"7. It was noted that the candidates must satisfy the conditions stipulated in the advertisement issued by SSC for CGLE-2019 CGLE 2019 & 2021. It was also noted that Para 8.3.1 of the Notification of SSC for CGLE 2019 related to educational qualification provides "Bachelor's Degree in any subject with Statistics as one of the subjects from a recognized University or Institute. The Candidates must have studied Statistics as a subject in all the three years of the graduation course" and Para 8.3.1 of the Notification of SSC for the said post for CGLE CGLE-2021 for educational qualification provides "Bachelor's Degree in any subject with Statistics as one of the subjects from a recognized recognized University or Institute. The candidates must have studied Statistics as a subject in all the three years or all the 6 semesters of the graduation course" On this the Chairman and Shri Subhash Dasgupta, Member was of the view that as per the conditions conditions studying Statistics as a subject in all the three years is sufficient condition for eligibility as per the word 'or' and candidates having studied Statistics in all the three years but not in all the 6 semesters may be considered as eligible. It was noted that propriety demands fairness and equity noted with all those candidates who did not apply having regard to the qualifications prescribed in the advertisement for CGLE-
CGLE 2019 & 2021."
2.7. He contended that the aforesaid minutes are only an instruction, which would not culminate into a statute 39 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V or amendment. The respondents could not have taken a stand contrary to the recruitment rules.
2.8. He also drew reference to para 6 of the minutes of the ORGI meeting (supra), ( ), which reads as under:
under:-
"6. It was noted that University of Rajasthan have intimated that the candidates passed B. Com course from the University have not studied Statistics subject as one of the subjects in all 3 years/ 6 semester of graduation course (Annex. I) whereas Maharaja Ganga Singh Singh University has affirmed that the Students of Bachelors of Commerce (B. Com) studied Statistics as one of the subjects under the ABST group (Annex. II). Deen Dayal Upadhaya University has informed that Shri Neeraj Kushwaha has studied Statistics subject (Annex. III). University of Kota has informed that Shri Arpit Jain has studied "Accountancy and Business Statistics" subject in all the three years of his study in graduation. (Annex. IV). Maharaja Surajmal Brij Vishwavidyalaya, Bharatpur has sent the Syllabus Syllabus of all the three years of B. Com (ABST). (Annex. V)."
2.9. The learned counsel for the applicant further drew attention to para 8 of the minutes of the meeting of ORGI (supra), which led to cancellation of the candidature of (supra), the applicant, which reads as under:
under:-
"8. The Committee examined and discussed the issue of educational qualifications of each of the candidates in complete details with reference to mark sheets and other documents placed in the dossiers sent by the remaining DCOs/SSC vis a vis the advertisement issued by SSC in CGLE-2019 2019 & CGLE CGLE-2021. After due deliberation on every aspect of the matter, detailed recommendations of committee based on the available documents provided, are attached at Annexure-'A'."
'A'."
40Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 2.10. Learned counsel illustrated that the minutes in Annexure A would reflect that at serial number 3, Kumar Annexure-A Avdhoot Meghraj, though not one of the applicants, had qualification as B.Sc. from Savitribai Phule Pune University and has been declared unfit by all the 5 Members of the Committee, which is clear cut case of non application of mind.
2.11. Illustratively, learned counsel further relied upon one candidate at serial number 12, Ms. Niharika, who is one of the applicants and she has been declared unfit by 4 Members of the Committee and declared fit by only one member. There is no reasoning assigned, as to why, she has been declared unfit.
2.12. Learned counsel further highlighted the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 9482/2019 decided on 17.12.2019 titled as Dr. (Major) Meeta Sahai Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., relevant paras of which reads as under:
under:-
"16. Furthermore, before beginning analysis of the legal issues involved, involved, it is necessary to first address the preliminary issue The maintainability of the very challenge by the appellant has been questioned on the ground that she having partaken in the selection process cannot later challenge it due to mere failure in selection. The counsel for respondents relied upon a selection.
catena of decisions of this Court to substantiate his objection.
***** 41 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V
18. However, we must differentiate from this principle insofar a candidate by agreeing to participate in the selection process only accepts the prescribed procedure and not the illegality in it. In a situation where a candidate alleges misconstruction of statutory rules and discriminating consequences arising therefrom, the same cannot be condoned merely because a candidate has partaken in it it. The constitutional scheme is sacrosanct and its violation in any manner is impermissible. In fact, a candidate may not have locus to assail the incurable illegality or derogation of the provisions of the Constitution, unless he/she participates in the selection selection process.
*****
20. The appellant has thus rightly not challenged the selection procedure but has narrowed her claim to only against the respondents' interpretation of 'work experience' as part of merit determination. Since interpretation of a statute statute or rule is the exclusive domain of Courts, and given the scope of judicial review in delineating such criteria, the appellant's challenge cannot be turned down at the threshold. However, we are not commenting specifically on the merit of appellant's case, case, and our determination is alien to the outcome of the selection process. It is possible post what is held hereinafter that she be selected, or not."
2.13. He further highlighted the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 152/2022 decided on 20.01.2022 in the matter of Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Ors., and specifically quoted the following paras:
paras:-
"12. The ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2008 were issued by the ESIC in the exercise of its powers under Section 97(1) and Section 17(3) of the ESI Act. These regulations introduced the cadre of Specialist (Teaching) in the ESIC and governed all appointment appointments to the teaching faculty posts in ESIC Medical Colleges. The ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2008 embodied a requirement of four years' service as Assistant Professor for promotion as an Associate Professor. The ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015 which were mademade on 5 July 2015 stipulated a requirement of five years' service as Assistant 42 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Professor for promotion to the post of Associate Professor. The preamble of the ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015 notes that these regulations were to supersede the ESIC Recruitment Recruitment Regulations 2008 and were made with the approval of the Central Government:
"....ln exercise of the powers conferred by sub sub- section (1) of Section 97, read with clause(xxi) of sub-section section (2) and sub section (2A) of the said section and sub-section section (3 (3) of section 17 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948) and in supersession of the Employees State Insurance Corporation (Medical Teaching Faculty posts) Recruitment Regulations, 2008 published in the Gazette of India vide No.A No.A-
12(11 )11/2008-Med.
Med. IV dated the 2nd May, 2009, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Employees' State Insurance Corporation hereby makes, with the approval of the Central Government, the following regulations for regulating ng the method of recruitment to the medical teaching faculty posts in the Employees' State Insurance Corporation's medical colleges, namely:- ..."
(emphasis supplied) *****
15. Respondent 3 to 25 joined the service of the ESIC Model Hospital, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru as Assistant Professors on different dates, between 07 February 2014 and 26 June 2016. On completing two years in the post of Assistant Professor, Respondent 3 to 25 made representations to the appellant seeking promotion to the grade of Associa Associate Professor, claiming the benefit of the DACP Scheme. The Preamble to the ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015, recites that the prior approval of the Central Government, as necessitated by Section 17(2) of the ESI Act was duly sought. In the event of a conf conflict between an executive instruction, an office memorandum in this case, and statutory regulations
- the latter prevail. A Constitution Bench in Sant Ram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan19 considered the applicability of the letters issued by the Government off India detailing the administrative practice for promotions, against the Indian Police Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1954. The Constitution Bench held that:
"7. We proceed to consider the next contention of Mr N.C. Chatterjee that in the absen absence of any statutory rules governing promotions to 43 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V selection grade posts the Government cannot issue administrative instructions and such administrative instructions cannot impose any restrictions not found in the Rules already framed. We are unable to acce accept this argument as correct. It is true that there is no specific provision in the Rules laying down the principle of promotion of junior or senior grade officers to selection grade posts. But that does not mean that till statutory rules are framed in this behalf the Government cannot issue administrative instructions regarding the principle to be followed in promotions of the officers concerned to selection grade posts. It is true that Government cannot amend or supersede statutory rules by administrative instructions, but if the rules are silent on any particular point Government can fill up the gaps and supplement the rules and issue instructions not inconsistent with the rules already framed."
(emphasis supplied) *****
20. The advertisements issued by the appellant mentioned that the DACP Scheme would be applicable for its recruits. However, it is a settled principle of service jurisprudence that in the event of a conflict between a statement in an advertisement and service regulations, the latter shal shall prevail. In Malik Mazhar Sultan v. U.P. Public Service Commission23 a two-judge two judge Bench of this Court clarified that an erroneous advertisement would not create a right in favour of applicants who act on such representation. The Court considered the eligib eligibility criteria for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) under the U.P. Judicial Service Rules, 2001 against an erroneous advertisement issued by the U.P. Public Service Commission and held:
"21. The present controversy has arisen as the advertisement issued by PSC stated that the candidates who were within the age on 1 1-7- 2001 and 1-7-2002 2002 shall be treated within age for the examination. Undoubtedly, the excluded candidates were of eligible age as per the advertisement but the recruitment to the service e can only be made in accordance with the Rules and the error, if any, in the advertisement cannot override the Rules and create a right in favour of a candidate if otherwise not eligible according to the Rules. The relaxation of age can be granted only if permissible under the Rules and not on the 44 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V basis of the advertisement. If the interpretation of the Rules by PSC when it issued the advertisement was erroneous, no right can accrue on basis thereof. Therefore, the answer to the question would turn upon th the interpretation of the Rules."
21. In Ashish Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh24 a two judge Bench of this Court followed the decision in two-judge Malik Mazhar Sultan (supra) in interpreting an advertisement issued by the Director, Social Welfare Department, Uttar Pradesh for the position of a psychologist. This Court declined to give precedence to the erroneous qualifications prescribed in the advertisement against the relevant recruitment rules and held:
"27. Any part of the advertisement which is contrary to the e statutory rules has to give way to the statutory prescription. Thus, looking to the qualification prescribed in the statutory rules, the appellant fulfils the qualification and after being selected for the post denying appointment to him is arbitrary and illegal. It is well settled that when there is variance in the advertisement and in the statutory rules, it is the statutory rules which take precedence...."
2.14. He also relied upon a decision of this Tribunal passed ssed in similar OA No. 2324/2021 in the matter of Ruby and Anr. Vs. SSC and Ors. which was decided on 22.02.2023 ( to which we will address later on the same has been quashed and set aside by the Hon'ble High Court.
2.15. Furthermore, learned counsel contended that the word "Statistics" in Recruitment Recruitment Rules is "inclusive" in definition and not an "exclusive" one. It has been further pointed out by him that there is a recent amendment to the recruitment rules.
45Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 2.16. Learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon the following judgment/orders:
judgment/orders:-
Sl. Decided Case Number Case Title Dated NO. By
1. Supreme Civil Appeal No. Meeta Sahai Vs. 17.12.2019 Court 9482/2019 State of Bihar and Ors.
2. Supreme Civil Appeal No. South Central 08.12.2014 Court 7130/2002 Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Employees Union Vs. B. Yashodabai And Others
3. Supreme Civil Appeal No. The Employees' 20.01.2022 Court 152/2022 State Insurance Corporation Vs. Union of India & Ors.
4. Kolkata O.A. No. Ranie Jasmine 28.03.2025 Bench, 350/00224/2023 Lakra Vs. Union of CAT India & Ors.
5. Principal O.A. No. 2324/2021 Ruby Vs. Staff 22.02.2023 Bench, Selection CAT Commission of India and Ors.
6. Supreme Civil Appeal No. Krishna Rai 16.06.2022 Court 4578-80/2022 (Dead) Thr. L.Rs.
& Ors. Vs. Banaras Hindu University & Ors. 7. High Court W.P.(C) Neeraj Pal Vs. 18.12.2018 of Delhi No.3993/2017 Central Warehousing Corporation. 8. High Court Special Civil Mamta A 17.02.2011 of Gujarat Application Ghodasara Vs. No.526/2011 State of Gujarat. 9. High Court LPA No.1097/2012 Mamta A 03.09.2012 of Gujarat in Spl Civil Ghodasara Vs. Application State of Gujarat. No.526/2011 10. High Court Writ Petition (C) No. P. Ranjitha Vs. 12.03.1990 of Delhi 2679/4093 of 1989 University Grants Commission & Ors 11. Supreme Civil Appeal No. P K Unni Vs. 20.02.1990 Court 1308/1990 Nirmala Industries and Ors. 12. High Court Writ Petition (C) No. Abhimeet Sinha & 06.05.2024 251/2016 Ors. Vs. High Court of 46
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Judicature at Patna & Ors.
13. High Court Writ Petition No. Divya Goyal Vs. 31.10.2014 of Madhya 4217/2013 State of M P & Pradeh Anr.
14. W.A. No. 8/2015 Divya Goyal Vs. 16.01.2015 State of M P & Anr.
15. Supreme Special Leave to Divya Goyal Vs. 16.01.2015 Court Appeal CC No. State of M P & 22104/2015 Anr.
16. Supreme (1989)1SCC175 Union of India Vs. Court Sri Somasundaram Vishwanath
17. Civil Writ Vinayak Kumar 23.01.2024 Jurisdiction No. Vs. State of Bihar 10601/2023
18. Supreme (2018)3 SCC 55 Ashish Kumar Vs. Court State of Uttar Pradesh
19. (1991)4 SCC 243 State of Sikkim Vs. Dorjee Tshering Bhutia
20. High Court W.P. No. 4259/2021 Sanapala VLN 25.02.2021 of Andhra Uday Kumar Vs. Pradesh State of Andhra Pradesh
21. (1978) 2 SCC 632 Mohinder Singh Gill Vs. Chief Election Commissioner
22. Supreme Civil Appeals Nos. PU Joshi & Ors. 19.12.2002 Court 4679-80 of 1996 Vs. Accountant General, Ahmedabad and Others
23. High Court W.P. (C) No. Neeraj Pal & Ors. 18.12.2018 of Delhi 3993/2017 Vs. Central Warehousing Corporation
24. High Court W.P. (C) No. Varun Aneja Vs. 05.11.2024 of Delhi 15416/2024 Union of India & Ors.
25. Supreme Civil Appeals Nos. Krishna Rai & 16.06.2022 Court 4578-80 of 2022 Ors. Vs. Banaras Hindu University and Ors.
26. (2007) 9 SCC 337 Punjab Warehousing Corpn. Vs. Manmohan Singh
27. Principal O.A. No. 1039/2004 Ram Prakash 23.02.2005 Bench, Pathak Vs. CAT Directorate of 47 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Education & Ors.
2.17. Mr. Setu Niket, learned counsel for the applicant in O.A. Nos. 883/2024, 1347/2024, 2910/2024, 3069/2023, 3631/2023, 42/2024, 1213/2024, 1244/2024, 1344/2024, 1348/2024, 1356/2024, 1357/2024, 1369/2024, 1389/2024, 1777/2024, 1779/2024, 1212/2024 and 3151/2024, has highlighted the following chart, depicting tthe educational qualification(s) submitting that the applicants have studied "Statistics" as subject in all three years of degree:
degree:-
SL Case No. Case Name of Name of Batc Study of No title Universit Course h Statistics . y (Applicant)
1. O.A/883/ Rajat Universit BBA 2007 Marksheet 2024 Kashya y of (Financi - and Syllabus-
p Delhi al 2010 6 semesters-
Kumar Investme Page 72-81 of
v. UOI nt O.A.
Analysis Certificate
) issued by
University-
Page 63 of OA
2. O.A./134 Purva Rajastha B.Com 2014 Marksheet
7/2024 Bindal n - and Syllabus-
VS Universit 2016 3 years - Page
Home y, Jaipur 75-77 of O.A.
Affairs Certificate
issued by
University-
Page 72 of
O.A.
3. O.A./291 Anju Vs Kuruksh B.Sc 2014 Marksheet
0/2024 Home etra - and Syllabus-
Affairs Universit 6 semesters-
48
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V And y 2017 Page 62-67, Others 72-77 of O.A. Certificate issued by University-
Page 72 of O.A.
4. O.A./306 Neeraj Deen B.Com 2011 Marksheet 9/2023 Kushw Dayal - and Syllabus-
aha v. Upadhy 2014 3 years - Page
Home ay 45-47 of OA
Affairs Universit Certificate
y, issued by
Gorakhp University-
ur Page 48-49 of
O.A.
5. O.A/3631 Vineet Maharaj B.Com 2019 Marksheet
/2023 Sharma a Ganga and Syllabus-
v. UOI Singh 3 years - Page
Universit 55-58 of O.A.
y, Certificate
Bikaner issued by
University-
Page 47 of
O.A.
6. O.A/42/2 Kuldee Maharaj B.Com 2018 Marksheet
024 p Sagar a - and Syllabus-
v. UOI Surajmal 2021 3 years - Page
Brij 77-88 of O.A.
Universit
y,
Bharatp
ur
7. O.A/1213 Palak Maharaj B.Com 2018 Marksheet
/2024 Kukkar a Ganga and Syllabus-
v. UOI Singh 3 years - Page
Universit 78-80 of O.A.
y,
Bikaner Certificate is
at page 132 of
O.A.
8. O.A./124 Niharik Lingaya' BBA(G) 2011 Marksheet
4/2024 a Vs s Lalita and Syllabus-
Home Devi 6 semesters-
Affairs Manage Page 70 of OA
ment & Certificate
sciences issued by
College- Page
64 of OA
9. O.A/1344 Sharuk Maharaj B.Com 2019 Marksheet
/2024 h a Ganga and Syllabus-
49
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Panwar Singh 3 years - Page v. UOI Universit 85-100 of OA y, Certificate Bikaner issued by University-
Page 76,80 of OA
10. O.A./134 Khushb Maharaj B.Com 2015 Marksheet 8/2024 u VS a Ganga and Syllabus-
Home Singh 3 years - Page Affairs Universit 74-76 of OA y, Bikaner 11. O.A/1356 Vishal Maharaj B.Com 2019 Marksheet /2024 Julaha a Ganga and Syllabus- v. UOI Singh 3 years - Page Universit 77-80 of OA y, Bikaner 12. O.A/1357 Simran Maharaj B.Com 2016 Marksheet /2024 Diwan a Ganga - and Syllabus- v. UOI Singh 2018 3 years - Page Universit 72-74 of OA y, Certificate Bikaner issued by University- Page 70 o f OA 13. O.A/1369 Sourab Maharaj B.Com 2013 Marksheet /2024 h a Ganga - and Syllabus- Mishra Singh 2015 3 years - Page v. UOI Universit 73-75 of OA y, Certificate Bikaner issued by University- Page 72 o f OA 14. O.A/1389 Ajay Maharaj B.Com 2014 Marksheet /2024 Singh a Ganga - and Syllabus- v. UOI Singh 2016 3 years - Page Universit 75-77 of OA y, Certificate Bikaner issued by University- Page 74 o f OA 15. O.A/1777 Keshab Universit B.Com 2014 Marksheet /2024 Singh y of and Syllabus- Guriar Rajastha 3 years - Page v. UOI n 77-79 of OA Certificate issued by University- 50
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Page 74- 75 of OA
16. O.A./l Sandee Rajastha B.Com 2014 Marksheet 779/2024 p n and Syllabus-
Kumar Universit 3 years - Page
Meena y, Jaipur 84-86 of OA
Vs Certificate
Home issued by
Affairs University-
Page 81 of OA
17. O.A/1212 Samir Maharaj B.Com 2018 Marksheet
/2024 v. UOI a Ganga and Syllabus-
Singh 3 years - Page
Universit 73-75 of OA
y,
Bikaner
18. O.A./ Lalit Universit BA 2017 Marksheet -
3151/202 Yadav y of (Hons.) - page 65 of OA
4 v. Delhi Economi 2020
Home cs Degree issued
Affairs by University-
and Page 67 of OA
Others
2.18. Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant in O.A. Nos. 1795/2024, 1776/2024, 1797/2024, 1796/2024 and 1778/2024, has highlighted the following chart, depicting the applicants have studied "Statistics" as subject in all three years of degree:
degree:-
Sl OA no. Name Univers Batc Study Study of Ref./Remarks . ity h of Stats.
Stats.
1. 1795/ Rajesh Rajasth 2013 B.Com- B.Com B.Com- Only Ann.R-2, of 2024 Kr. an All 3 during First Courter Reply Meena Univers years year year-as (OA/1795/202 ity, as per admitted by 4) Committee Jaipur contenti Respondent Report, dt.
on of s 3/8/2023,
Applica para 3 and last
nt para
51
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V
2. 1776/ Rinku -Do- -Do- -Do- -Do- -Do-
2024 Ola
(Because
he/she is
Batchmate of
Rajesh Kr
Meena)
3. 1797/ Shakti -Do- -Do- -Do- -Do- -Do-
2024 Singh
4. 1796/ Manoj -Do- 2014 -Do- -Do- Ann. R-13, of
2024 Chatur Counter reply
vedi (OA/1344/202
4), Shahrukh
Panwar vs UOI,
Minutes of
Meeting, dated
27/07/2023,
para-3 with
Table
5. 1778/ Nand MGS 2014 -Do- -Do- Ann. R-13, of
2024 Kishor Univers Courter Reply
Pareek ity, (OA 1389/
Bikaner 2024) Ajay
Singh Vs. UOI
(2014 batch),
Resp. no. 3
letter dt.
22/09/2023 to
M G S
University,
Bikaner, Para 3
with Table-
Because Ajay
Singh is
Batchmate of
Nand Kishor
Pareek
2.19. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, learned counsel for the applicant in O.A. Nos. 2729/2023, 2 2738/2023, 1956/2024, 175/2024, 2815/2023 and 3050/2023, has highlighted the following chart, depicting the applicants 52 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V have studied "Statistics" as subject in all three years of degree:
degree:-
S. Case Case Title Name of Name of Semester-wise wise subjects studied No. No. University Course as Statistics and College
1. O.A. Suman UG- Delhi UG- B.A. I- Statistical Methods in No. Sogan vs. University, (Economic Economics-I 2729/2 Ministry Maitreyi s) (Hons.) II- Statistical Methods in 023 of Home College Economics-II III- Introductory Affairs Econometrics (Direct PG- M.A. Application of Statistics) PG- Indira (Economic IV- Linear Algebra and Gandhi s) Calculus (Partly Related) National V- Development Theory Open and Experience-II (Partly Related) University VI- Applied Econometrics (Direct Application of Statistics at advanced level)
2. O.A. Pravesh UG- Delhi UG- B.A. I- Statistical Methods in No. vs. University, (Economic Economics-I 2738/2 Ministry Atma Ram s) (Hons.) II- Statistical Methods in 023 of Home Sanatan Economics-II Dharma III- Introductory Affairs Econometrics (Direct College PG- M.A. Application of Statistics) PG- Indira (Economic IV- Linear Algebra and
s) Calculus (Partly Related) Gandhi V- Development Theory National and Experience-II (Partly Open Related) University VI- Applied Econometrics (Direct Application of Statistics at advanced level)
3. O.A. Ashok UG- Delhi UG- B.A. I- Statistical Methods in No. Pratap University, (Economic Economics-I 1956/2 Singh vs. Atma Ram s) (Hons.) II- Statistical Methods in 024 Ministry Sanatan Economics-II III- Introductory of Home Dharma Econometrics (Direct Affairs College PG- M.A. Application of Statistics) (Economic IV- Linear Algebra and
s) Calculus (Partly Related) PG- Aligarh V- Development Theory Muslim and Experience-II (Partly Related) 53 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V University VI- Applied Econometrics (Direct Application of Statistics at advanced level)
4. O.A. Ashavri UG- Delhi UG- B.A. 1st year- Mathematical No. Sanon vs. Technologic (Economic Methods for Economics-1, Economics 175/20 Ministry al s) (Hons.) Mathematical Methods for 24 of Home University Economics-II 2nd year- Statistical Affairs PG- Indira Methods Introductory PG- M.A. Econometrics, for Gandhi (Economic Economics.
National
s) 3rd year- Applied
Open Econometrics
University
5. O.A. Sachin Maharaja B.A 1st year- Statistics for
No. Kumar vs. Agrasen (Business Business Economics
2815/2 Ministry College, Economic 2nd year- Basis
023 of Home Delhi s) (Hons.) Econometrics (Advanced
Statistics with Applied
Affairs & University
Economics)
Ors. 3rd year- Computational
Techniques for Business
Economics (Applied
Statistics)
6. O.A. Rahul vs. Delhi B. Tech I- Maths-1 1 (Infinite series,
No. Ministry Technologic Differential and Integral
3050/2 of Home al Calculus of single variable,
023 Affairs University Calculus of several
variables, Multiple
Integrals, Vector
differential and Integral
Calculus)
II- Maths-22 (Matrices, Rank of Matrices, Cayley Hamilton theorem, Echelon form off Matrices, Ordinary Differential equations with second and higher order differential equations) III- Engineering Analysis and Design (Engineering design system, Modeling, specification of design) IV- Industrial Engineering and Operation Research 54 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V (Demand Forecasting, Inventory model, Linear Programming using simplex and artificial variable methods, Transport models, Assignment Problem, Measure of forecasting errors) V- Production, Planning and Control (Quality Engineering, Statistical Control Limits, Reliability Relia and Maintenance, ANOVA, Markov model, Weibull models) VI- Data Science for Engineers (Regression analysis, Scatter diagram, Spearman's and Karl Pearson's coefficient of correlation, Bivariate data, Statistical data analysis using R) VII- Quantitativee Technique (Introduction to Statistics, Introduction to probability theory, Hypothesis testing, Game Theory, Application of Statistical Packages) VIII-Total Total Quality Management (Introduction to Quality, Statistical Process Control, Acceptance Sampling, Life Lif Testing Reliability, Reliability Design and Allocation) 2.20. Mr. Ajesh Luthra, learned counsel for the applicant in O.A. No. 993/2024, has highlighted the following chart, depicting the applicants have studied "Statistics" as subject in all three years of degree:-
Sr. Name B.com 1st B.com 1st B.com B.com B.com B.com M.com M.com No. year Year Paper 2nd Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 3rd Year Done Subject Subjects Subjects Paper Subjects Paper 55 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V
1. Income Tax (ABST) 1.Corporat 2138-(ABST) 1138-(ABST) 3146- 1. (EAFM) e Accountancy2. Cost Econo Accountancy (ABST) Auditin 1 Rakesh &Business &Business Accounting Yes mics Business &Financial Accountan g Kumar Accounting Statistics admini Statistics cy &Mana Sharma 1. Busine stratio &Busines gement ss n s 2.
Statistics &Finan
Statistics Functio cial
nal Manag
Account ement
ing
1. Income Tax
(ABST) 1. Corporat 2138-(ABST) 1138-(ABST) 3146- 1. Auditi e Accountancy2. Cost Accountancy (ABST) ng 2 Praveen &Business &Business Accounting No NA Business &Financial Accountan &Manag Kumar Accounting Statistics Statistics cy ement Sharma
2. Busine &Busines 2. O ss s peration Statistics Statistics Reasear ch
1. Corporat 2138-(ABST) 1. Income Tax (EAFM) 1138-(ABST) (ABST) 3146- 1. Auditi Accountancy e Accountancy2. Cost (ABST) Econo ng
3 Rahul &Business Accounting Yes mics Business &Financial &Business Accountan &Manag Jangid Accounting Statistics admini Statistics cy ement
2. Busines stratio &Busines 2. Adva s Statistics n s nce &Finan Statistics Accounti cial ng Manag ement
1. Income Tax (ABST) 1. Corporat 2138-(ABST) 1138-(ABST) 3146- 1. Audi (ABST) e Accountancy 2. Cost Accountancy (ABST) ting Accoun 4 Dholyara &Business &Business Accounting Yes Business &Financial Accountan &Mana tancy m Saini Accounting Statistics Statistics cy gement &Busin
2. Busine &Busines 2. M ess ss s anage Statisti Statistics Statistics ment cs Account ing 2.21. Mr. Ram Niwas Buri, learned counsel for the applicant in O.A. No. 688/2024, has highlighted the following chart, depicting the applicant has studied "Statistics" as subject in all three years of degree:
degree:-
Year Statistics 3 years % of Marks Name of degree courses obtained & Graduation division University 2019 B.Com Part I 66.5 (First) Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner 2020 B.Com Part II Promoted -Do-56
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V (Covid-19)
19) 2021 B.Com Part III 70.4 (First) -Do-
POST GRADUTION 2022 M.Com (Prev.) 87(First) Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner 2023 M.Com (Final) 84.7 (First) -Do- Note:-- (page 43)- Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner has issued certificate of study of Accounts & Business Statistics in all 3 years of Graduation.
2.22. In addition to above, it has been argued that many applicants have also studied Statistics at P Post Graduate level as well thus, thus, said higher qualification cannot be ignored in light of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Puneet Sharma & Ors.
Vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd.
and Anr. (CA No. 1318-1322 1318 1322 of 2021) 2021).
3. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. R. V. Sinha alongwith other counsels representing the official respondents in respective OA(s) OA(s) argued that the present OA itself is not maintainable. It has been contended that mere participation in the selection process does not give an indefinite right to the applicant(s) for appointment.
3.1 Mr. R V Sinha, learned counsel for the respondents in O.A. No. 1344/2024, drew strength from the averment made in the counter reply highlighting following novel points:-
points:57
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 3.1.1. Learned counsel submitted tthat the applicant does not have any cause of action to file the present O.A. O.A. The action of the replying respondent is just, bonafide and in accordance with the rules, including the terms of advertisement The applicant's status has all along advertisement.
been provisional and the replying respondents are within their jurisdiction to withdraw the offer of appointment once it was found that the applicant does not fulfil the eligibility criteria. It is trite law that even a selectee does not have indispensable right of appointment. Reliance is place on:
a. Shankara Dash Vs UOI, reported as (1991) 3 SCC 47 b. T. Jayakumar Vs A. Gopu, reported as (2008) 9 SCC 403 c. S.S. Balu Vs State of Kerala, reported as (2009) 2 SCC 479 3.1.2 Learned counsel further submitted that it is a trite law that it is the prerogative of the employer and/or the selecting body to decide and evaluate the eligibility criteria of the candidate and the Courts or Tribunal will not interfere in their decision even if it considers otherwise. Reliance is "Tajvir Singh Sodhi & Ors Vs State of placed on "Tajvir 58 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Jammu & Kashmir & Ors", Ors", reported as 2 2023 SCC Online SC 344.
3.1.3. Learned counsel further stated that it is also trite law that the advertisement and instructions issued therein are in the nature of statute and the same need to be complied by all concerned, it cannot be given relaxation in favour of a particular person even if it causes hardships. Likewise, the Court or Tribunal will not interpret the advertisement and clauses thereof in a manner, once the selection process starts, in a manner which may cause prejudice to the other persons who ho complied with the terms of advertisement and instructions therein since it will be lead to violation of Articles 14 & 16 to other s employees. Reliance is placed on;
"a.
a. Bedanga Talukdar Vs Saifudaullah Khan & Ors, reported as (2011) 12 SCC 85;
b. State te of Tamil Nadu & Ors Vs G. Hemlathaa & Anr., reported as (2020) 19 see 430;
c. Ankita Thakur & ors Vs H.P. Staff Selection Commission & Ors, reported as 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1472."
3.2 Learned counsel also drew attention to the minutes of the meeting of the Committee ORGI held on 59 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 31.10.2023, 01.11.2023, 06.11.2023, 14.11.2023 and 01.12.2023, which are reproduced herein below:
below:-
"Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 31.10.2023, 01.11.2023, 06.11.2023, 36 14.11.2023 and 01.12.2023 for making recommendation about fulfillment of the educational qualification of candidates nominated by SSC for the post of S.I. Grade II through CGLE-2019 CGLE 2019 & CGLE CGLE-2021 in ORGI-
reg.
With the approval of RG&CCI, a Committee has been constituted in ORGI (Hqrs) for examining and making appropriate recommendations about fulfillment of educational qualification of the candidates nominated by Staff Selection Commission (SSC) to the post of Statistical Investigator Gr. II through (CGLE (CGLE-2019 & CGLE -2021) 2021) in ORGI (Hqrs) a and DCOs. The composition of Committee is as under
(i) Shri Sanjay, Addl. RG Chairman
(ii) Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Addl. RG Member
(iii) Shri Manoj Kumar, DDG Member
(iv) Shri Ajay Garg, Director, DCO, Delhi Member
(v) Shri Subhash Dasgupta, DRG Member
2. The Committee was briefed in precise details the issue under consideration. The Committee was informed that RRs for the post of Statistical Investigator Grade Il Grade-Il provides for Essential Qualification Bachelor degree in any subject with Statistics as as one of the subjects from a recognized University or Institute". The Committee was further informed that Para 8.3.1 of the Notification of SSC for CGLE 2019 related to educational qualification provides "Bachelor's Degree in any subject with Statistics as one of the subjects from a recognized University or Institute. The Candidates must have studied Statistics as a subject in all the three years of the graduation course". The Committee was also informed that Para 8.3.1 of the Notification of SSC for the said sa post for CGLE-2021 2021 for educational qualification provides "Bachelor's Degree in any subject with Statistics as one of the subjects from a recognized University or Institute. The candidates must have studied Statistics as a subject in all the three years or all the 6 semesters of the graduation course". The above-mentioned above mentioned points and related issues were explained in complete details every time meeting took place. It was also placed before the committee that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Bedan Bedanga Talukdar Vs Saifudaullah Khan & Ors on 28.09.2011 has ordered that "it is settled law that there can be no 60 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V relaxation in the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement unless the power of relaxation is duly reserved in the relevant rules and /o /or in the advertisement. Even if there is a power of relaxation in the rules, the same would still have to be specifically indicated in the advertisement".
3. The Committee was informed that a total of 760 (112+648) Candidates, based on CGLE 2019 & CGL CGL- 2021, were nominated by SSC to ORGI for 2021, appointment to the post of S.1. Grade 11. These candidates were subsequently allocated to ORGI (Hqrs.) and DCOs for further appropriate action for their appointment. Thereafter, ORGI (Hqr.) has been receiving representations representations from the candidates as well as references from DCOs regarding suitability of some of the candidates because of their educational qualification in above context.
4. In this background, related information was sought from all the DCOs on following poi points: (a) Details of all cases of educational qualification of candidates having degree in B. Com with Accountancy & Business Statistics (b) Cases related to Educational Qualification of other candidates recommended for cancellation of Offer of Appointment except the cases mentioned in (a) above and (c) Other doubtful cases not covered under
(a) and (b) above. The dossiers and other related documents of the above-mentioned above mentioned candidates were placed before the above Committee. The Committee was informed that DCOsDCOs A & N, Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Language Division, Kolkata, Uttrakhand and Puducherry have furnished NIL information.
5. The Chairman of the Committee is of the view that it is very difficult to assess, whe whet within the subject, how much portion belongs to the subject "Statistics". Further, from the RRs or advertisement, it is also not clear, whether the Statistics should be the entire portion or only a part of the paper /subject. Shri Subhash Dasgupta, DRG and and Member corroborated this view. However, other three Members of the Committee were not in agreement with the views expressed by the Chairman and Shri Subhash Dasgupta, Member of the Committee.
6. It was noted that University of Rajasthan have intimated that the candidates passed B. Com course from the University have not studied Statistics subject as one of the subjects in all 3 years/ 6 semester of graduation course (Annex. I) whereas Maharaja Ganga Singh University has affirmed that the Students of Bachelors of Commerce (B. Com) studied Statistics as Bachelors one of the subjects under the ABST group (Annex. 11). Deen Dayal Upadhaya University has informed that 61 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Shri Neeraj Kushwaha has studied Statistics subject (Annex. III). University of Kota has informed that Shri Arpit Jain has studied "Accountancy and Business Statistics" subject in all the three years of his study in graduation. (Annex. IV). Maharaja Surajmal Brij Vishwavidyalaya, Bharatpur has sent the Syllabus of all the three years of B. Com (ABST). (Ann (Annex. V).
7. It was noted that the candidates must satisfy the conditions stipulated in the advertisement issued by SSC for CGLE-2019 CGLE 2019 & 2021. It was also noted that Para 8.3.1 of the Notification of SSC for CGLE CGLE-2019 related to educational qualification pr provides "Bachelor's Degree in any subject with Statistics as one of the subjects from a recognized University or Institute. The Candidates must have studied Statistics as a subject in all the three years of the graduation course" and Para 8.3.1 of the NotifNotification of SSC for the said post for CGLE-2021 CGLE 2021 for educational qualification provides "Bachelor's Degree in any subject with Statistics as one of the subjects from a recognized University or Institute. The candidates must have studied Statistics as a subjesubject in all the three years or all the 6 semesters of the graduation course"
On this the Chairman and Shri Subhash Dasgupta, Member was of the view that as per the conditions studying Statistics as a subject in all the three years is sufficient condition for eligibility as per the word 'or' and candidates having studied Statistics in all the three years but not in all the 6 semesters may be considered as eligible. It was noted that propriety demands fairness and equity with all those candidates who did not applyapply having regard to the qualifications prescribed in the advertisement for CGLE CGLE-2019 & 2021.
8. The Committee examined and discussed the issue of educational qualifications of each of the candidates in complete details with reference to mark sheets and other documents placed in the dossiers sent by the remaining DCOs/SSC vis a vis the advertisement issued by SSC in CGLE-2019 CGLE 2019 & CGLECGLE-2021. After due deliberation on every aspect of the matter, detailed recommendations of committee based on the available documents provided, are attached at Annexure documents Annexure-'A'.
9. The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair."
3.3 Learned counsel highlighted para(s) 15 to 18 of Judgment rendered in the matter of Union of India & 62 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Ors. Vs. Kali Dass Batish & Anr.
Anr., which are
reproduced
eproduced herein below:
"15. In this matter, the approach adopted by the Jharkhand High Court commends itself to us. The Jharkhand High Court approached the matter on the principle that judicial review is not available in such a matter. The Jharkhand High Court also rightly pointed out that mere inclusion of a candidate's name in the selection list gave him no right, and if there was no right, there could be no occasion to maintain a writ petition for enforcement of a non-
non-existing right.
16. In Punjab State State Electricity Board and Ors. v. Malkiat Singh , this Court reiterated the observations of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India as under:
"7. It is not correct to say that if a number of vacancies are notified for appo appointment and adequate number of candidates are found fit, the successful candidates acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed which cannot be legitimately denied. Ordinarily the notification merely amounts to an invitation to qualified candidates to applyly for recruitment and on their selection they do not acquire any right to the post. Unless the relevant recruitment rules so indicate, the State is under no legal duty to fill up all or any of the vacancies. However, it does not mean that the State has th the licence of acting in an arbitrary manner. The decision not to fill up the vacancies has to be taken bona fide for appropriate reasons. And if the vacancies or any of them are filled up, the State is bound to respect the comparative merit of the candidate candidates, as reflected at the recruitment test, and no discrimination can be permitted. This correct position has been consistently followed by this Court, and we do not find any discordant note in the decisions in State of Haryana v. Subhash Chander Marwaha , Neelimaelima Shangla v. State of Haryana or Jatinder Kumar v. State of Punjab ."
(emphasis supplied) This, in our view, is the correct approach to be adopted in dealing with a matter of this nature.
17. In K. Ashok Reddy v. Government of India and Ors. this Court indicated that however wide the power of judicial review under Articles 226 or 32 there is a recognised limit, albeit self-recognised, self recognised, to the exercise 63 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V of such power. This Court reiterated a ppassage from Craig's Administrative Law (Second Edn., p. 291)., vide Paragraph 21, as under:
"The traditional position was that the courts would control the existence and extent of prerogative power, but not the manner of exercise thereof. .... The traditi traditional position has however now been modified by the decision in the GCHQ case. Their Lordships emphasised that the reviewability of discretionary power should be dependent upon the subject subject-matter thereof, and not whether its source was statute or the prerogative.
ative. Certain exercises of prerogative power would, because of their subject-matter, matter, be less justiciable, with Lord Roskill compiling the broadest list of such forbidden territory ...."
The observations of Lord Roskill, referred to above are from Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service (GCHQ case) as under:
"But I do not think that that right of challenge can be unqualified. It must, I think, depend upon the subject- matter of the prerogative power which is exercised. Many exampl examples were given during the argument of prerogative powers which as at present advised I do not think could properly be made the subject of judicial review. Prerogative powers such as those relating to the making of treaties, the defence of the realm, the prerogative rogative of mercy, the grant of honours, the dissolution of Parliament and the appointment of ministers as well as others are not, I think, susceptible to judicial review because their nature and subject-matter matter are such as not to be amenable to the judiciall process."
18. Finally, this Court emphasised judicial restraint by citing with approval a passage in De Smith's Judicial Review of Administrative Action, (vide Paragraph 23) as under:
"Judicial self-restraint restraint was still more marked in cases where attempts s were made to impugn the exercise of discretionary powers by alleging abuse of the discretion itself rather than alleging non existence of the state of affairs on which the validity of its exercise was predicated. Quite properly, the courts were slow to rread implied limitations into grants of wide discretionary powers which might have to be exercised on the basis of broad considerations of national policy."64
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Based on this reasoning, it was acknowledged that the transfer of a Judge of the High Court based on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India would be immune from judicial review as there is "an inbuilt check against arbitrariness and bias indicating absence of need for judicial review on those grounds. This is how the area of justiciability is rreduced...."
3.4. Learned counsel also contended that there is no requirement of observing the principles of natural justice in the matter of cancellation, as no indefeasible right has accrued to the applicant, and even otherwise an offer of appointment is not a concluded contract in terms of Indian Contract Act as per para 16 of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Kali Dass Batish & Anr. (supra).
3.5. Learned counsel further contended that correctness of the decision cannot be challenge. It is also submitted that it is a procedure followed in reaching a decision, which can be a subject matter of judicial scrutiny and not the decision itself.
3.6. Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance upon the following orders orders/judgments:-
Sl. Decided Case Number Case Title Dated NO. By
1. High Writ Petition (C) Staff Selection 17.03.2025 Court No. 11322/2023 Commission & Ors. Vs. Ruby & Ors.
2. High Review Pet. Staff Selection 21.04.2025 Court 216/2025 Commission & Ors. Vs. Ruby & In Ors.
Writ Petition (C) 65 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V No. 11322/2023
3. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Official 04.11.2008 Court 2985/2007, Liquidator Vs. 2986 to Dayanand And 2990/2007, Others 6455/2008 and 6456/2008
4. Supreme SCC (2006)10 Ekta Shakti 17.07.2006 Court 337 Foundation Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
5. Supreme Civil Appeals No. State of Uttar 12.12.2022 Court 8822-8823/ Pradesh Vs. 2022 Karunesh Kumar and Others
6. Supreme Civil Appeal No. Ashok Kumar 21.10.2016 Court 9092/2012 and Anothers Vs. State of Bihar and Anothers
7. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Ranjan Kumar 16.04.2014 Court 4455-58/2009 and Others Vs. with 4459- State of Bihar 80/2009 and Others
8. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Dhananjay 05.03.2008 Court 1771/2008 with Malik and 1772/2008, Others Vs. State 1773/2008 if Uttaranchal and Others
9. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Maharashtra 03.05.2019 Court 4597/2019, Public Service 4598-601/2019 Commission Vs. and 4602/2019 Sandeep Shiram Warade and others
10. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Tej Prakash 07.11.2024 Court 2634/2013 Pathak and Others Vs. Rajasthan High Court and Others
11. Supreme Civil Appeal No. Union Territory 03.11.1992 Court 4649/1992 of Chandigarh Vs. Dilbagh Singh and Others
12. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Aligarh Muslim 28.08.2000 Court 4780-81/ 2000 University and Others Vs. Mansoor Ali Khan
13. Supreme Civil Appeal No. Ashok Kumar 23.02.2007 Court 4761/2006 Sonkar Vs. Union of India 66 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V and Others
14. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Union of India 05.01.2006 Court 6663/2004 and and Others Vs. 7575-76/2004 Kali Dass Batish and Anothers
15. Supreme Civil Appeal No. S S Balu And 13.01.2009 Court 104/2009 Anothers Vs. State of Kerala and Others
16. Supreme Civil Appeal No. Shankarsan 30.04.1991 Court 8613/1983 Dash Vs. Union of India
17. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Tejvir Singh 28.03.2023 Court 2164-2172/2023 Sodhi & Ors.
Vs. State of J&K
18. Supreme Civil Appeals No. State of Tamil 28.08.2019 Court 6669/ 2019 Nady and Ors.
Vs. G Hemalathaa and Anothers 19. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Bedanga 28.09.2011 Court 8343-44/2011 Talukdar Vs. Saifudaullah Khan and Others 20. Supreme Civil Appeals No. Ankita Thakur 09.11.2023 Court 7602-06/2023 & Ors. Vs. H.P Staff Selection Commission & Ors.
3.7. The other limb of the arguments of the learned counsel for the respondents is that instructions issued by the Commission are mandatory and in accordance with law, which need to be strictly c complied with. He also contended that, if the Court is of the opinion that rules or instructions require relaxation or modification, it would be appropriate to remand the matter to the competent authority to adjudicate upon the issue.
67Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V
4. Heard learned counsel el for the parties and perused the records of the cases.
5. ANALYSIS "Interpretation is riotous or debatable"
5.1. In the matter of Nyadar Singh & Anr. vs. Union Of India & Ors.1988 Ors.1988 SCR SUPL. (2) 546, the Apex Court was of the view that to to find out the exact connotation of a word in a statute, we must look to the context in which it is used, used observing :-
"The The meaning to be given to a particular statutory language depends on the evaluation of a number of interpretative criteria. Shorn of the context, the words interpretative-criteria.
by themselves are "slippery customers". The general presumption is that these criteria do not detra detract or stand apart from, but are to be be-harmonised with, the well accepted legal-
legal principles. In a difficult case, the number of relevant interpretative interpretative-criteria may be so high that the task of the court in assessing their effect is, correspondingly, difficult.
difficult. Even the statutory statutory-
language apparently free from the sins of semantic ambiguity might not, in the context of the purpose, connote or convey its lexicographic thrust; but would acquire a different shade or colour imparted to it by the variations of the interpretation-criteria.
criteria. The ambiguity need not necessarily be a grammatical ambiguity, but one of appropriateness of the meaning in a particular context.
Francis Bennion in his "Statutory interpretation" refers to the nature of the task in weighing the ffactors: "......it is necessary for the interpreter to assess the respective weights of the relevant interpretative factors and determine which of the opposing constructions they favour on balance . . . . ."
"We may speak of the factors tending in a certain direction as a bundle of factors. This is figurative, but then so is the idea of factors being 'weighed'. The court is 68 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V unlikely even to consider the factors one by one, and certainly will not proceed in any any mechanistic way . . . . ."
"We find that one bundle of factors favours one of the opposing constructions of the enactment. while the other bundle favours the other construction. [As to opposing constructions see s. 84 of this Code. ] . There may be factors factors drawn from a single interpretative criterion in both bundles . . . . ."
[See `Statutory interpretation by Francis Bennion. 1984 End.-
End. page 390] It is true that where statutory language should be given its most obvious meaning meaning-to accord with how a man in the street might answer the problems posed by the words' words'-the Statute must be taken as one finds it.
Consideration relevant to interpretation are not whether a differently conceived or worded statute would have yielded results more consonant with fairness and reasonableness. Consequences do not fairness alter the statutory Language, but may only help to fix its meaning."
5.2. In Presentation at the Oxford University and University of Notre Dame Seminar on Public Law Theory:
19.09.2024 -by Lord Sales Topics in Legal Interpretation, 19.09.2 titled The role of purpose in legislative interpretation: inescapable but problematic necessity what has been highlighted is ::-
necessity, "Arguments about statutory interpretation often resolve into contests between apparent natural meaning of a text according to grammatical rules (but assessed in the light of a very thin notion of context) and meaning (ie natural meaning) assessed in the li light of the purpose of the statute, which is a thicker and more dense specification of the context in which the language has been used. Ordinary grammatical sense tends to be over inclusive in relation to the aims of the legislature. This feature of interpr interpretation is particularly strong in relation to statements of law, because they have authoritative effect across time and situations potentially far removed from those to which the legislature directed its attention and there is no simple mechanism for recourse recourse back to it for clarification as new circumstances arise. Courts have to interpret 69 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V legislation to arrive at what the legislature "really" meant. On this view, but on the critical assumption that the courts are able accurately to identify the general purpose purpose of the legislature in enacting the legislation, purposive interpretation best reflects fidelity to enacted law, with the courts as faithful agents of the legislature."
5.3. A reference has been made to the opinion of Foster J in Lon Fuller's Case of the he Speluncean Explorers (1949) 62 Harv L Rev 616), thus:
"No superior wants a servant who lacks the capacity to read between the lines. The stupidest housemaid knows that when ... her master tells her to 'drop everything and come running' he has overlooke overlooked the possibility that she is at the moment in the act or rescuing the baby from the rain barrel. Surely we have the right to expect the same modicum of intelligence from the judiciary. The correction of obvious legislative errors or oversights is not to supplant supplant the legislative will, but to make that will effective."
effective."According to Foster J, a law must "be interpreted reasonably, in the light of its evident purpose".
5.4. The central importance is interpreting any legislation or identifying its purpose. The c courts will not interpret a statute so as to produce absurd results.
5.5. In a statute, "with" or "in" generally means that something is included as part of a larger whole, signifying that the specified element is considered alongside or within the broader context being described; essentially, it indicates that the action or item mentioned must be considered together with the other elements outlined in the statute. It signifies that the mentioned element is not separate but is incorporated 70 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V into the broader category category or action being defined that is to say it is an inclusive definition.
5.6. In Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors Versus Sachin Gupta - W.P.(C) 1520/2012, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi decided on 7.8.2013 7.8.2013, observed as under :-
:
"40. To repeat, repeat, corrigendum dated March 30, 2010 prescribes that the expression 'elective subject' occurring in the Recruitment Rules means that 'The candidate should have studied the subject concerned as mentioned in the RR's in all parts/years of graduation. The elective elective word may also include main subject as practiced in different universities. It is clear that the ethos of the prescription contained in the corrigendum dated March 30, 2010 that 'the candidate should have studied the subject concerned as mentioned in the the RR's in all parts/years of graduation is that the candidate should have a deep understanding of the subject in which he is desirous of imparting education to the children.
41. All universities in India do not offer a particular elective subject in all three three years' of graduation course as in the case of Nainika, Vikram Singh and Sachin Gupta, where Delhi University did not teach English/Hindi/Economics in all three years of B.A. program/B.Com (H) course (s) conducted by it. If the corrigendum dated March 30, 2010 is given a literal interpretation, all such candidates who have studied concerned subject i.e. the subject for which they have applied from the Universities which are not teaching said subject in all three years' of Graduation course offered by themthem would be rendered ineligible for appointment to the post of T.G.T. despite the fact they have studied the concerned subject in all parts/years in which the subject is taught by the university and have a good understanding thereof. This is absurd. It is a settled legal position that where literal meaning of a statute or rule leads to an absurdity, the principle of literal interpretation need not be followed and recourse should be taken to the purposive and meaningful 71 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V interpretation to avoid injustice, abs absurdity and contradiction so that the intent of the purpose of Legislature is given effect to. Therefore, a meaningful and practical interpretation has to be given to the corrigendum dated March 30, 2010 and same should be interpreted as follows: 'the candi candidate should have studied the subject concerned as mentioned in the RR's in all parts/years in which the subject was taught during the Graduation course.
42. It has also to be kept in mind that whereas the University of Delhi was teaching the concerned subj subject and was testing the knowledge of the students each year by assigning 100 marks to the paper i.e. three papers were being taught in the three years, as a result of restructuring, the number of papers continued to be three with marks assigned to each pap paper, being 100, except that now the three papers are taught in only two years. In other words the previous and the current position continues to be practically the same. It hardly matters whether three papers of 100 marks each are taught over three years or three papers of 100 marks each are taught in two years. A ready illustration could be a rational decision taken that unless a student studies History up to a particular level he may not understand the nuances of Political Science and hence University may decide that the subject of Political Science should be taught after a foundation course in History is taught and this would mean that the subject of Political Science is introduced in the second year of study and continued in the third. The previous position position of teaching Political Science in each year with one paper each year having 100 marks is replaced by teaching Political Science only in the second and the third year but retaining the three papers each having 100 marks.
43. In view of the aforesaid, respondents Nainika, Vikram Singh and Sachin Gupta who have studied the concerned subject, English/Hindi/Economics (one of the main subjects prescribed for T.G.T. (Social Science), in all the years in which the subject was tau taught during the graduation courses undertaken by them are eligible to be appointed to the post of T.G.T. (English)/(Hindi)/Social Science.
44. As regards respondent Snehlata, there is a subtle but material difference between the position of respondents Nainika, Nainika, Vikram Singh and Sachin Gupta and she.72
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V
45. Respondent Snehlata had applied for being appointed to the post of T.G.T. (Sanskrit). It is an admitted fact that she has not studied Sanskrit subject in any year of the Graduation course undertaken by her, but has subsequently appeared in an examinati examination conducted by the University and cleared three papers pertaining to Sanskrit subject after studying the same in one year.
46. The corrigendum dated March 30, 2010 prescribes that 'the candidate should have studied the subject concerned as mentioned in the the RRs in all parts/years of graduation. The elective word may also include main subject as practiced in different universities. We emphasize the word 'studied' occurring in the corrigendum dated March 30, 2010. Respondent Snehlata who has not studied conc concerned subject i.e. Sanskrit subject in the graduation course undertaken by her is clearly not eligible for appointment to the post of T.G.T. (Sanskrit). After clearing the Graduation course and obtaining a degree what she has done is to have studied some kindkind of a course designed by the University and has learnt Sanskrit. The degree which she has in Graduation does not pertain to the subject Sanskrit.
47. The controversy pertaining to Neelam Rana is not in the context of what would be an elective subject studied tudied during Graduation. Admittedly Neelam Rana seeks appointment as T.G.T. English, a subject which she never studied in her Graduation course which we find was B.Sc. (Botany) but she fights the battle on the strength of having obtained a Post Graduate D Degree in English i.e. M.A.(English).
48. This issue is no longer res integra and stands decided by a decision of a Division Bench of this Court reported as 2002 (61) DRJ 58 Manju Pal v Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi.
In said case, the appellant who had studied Hindi at Graduate level applied for being appointed to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher in the MCD. Despite being successful in the selection process conducted for said purpose, the appellant was not appointed to the post of Assistant Primary Teacher on the ground that she had not studied Hindi at the Higher Secondary Level and is thus not eligible for being appointed to said post. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the appellant had filed a writ petition before a Single Judge of thi this 73 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Court which got dismissed. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant filed a Letters Patent Appeal before a Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench allowed the appeal filed by the appellant and held that the appellant is eligible for being appointed to tthe post of Primary Assistant Teacher in MCD as she possessed a higher qualification than the qualification required for appointment to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. It would be relevant to note following portion of the said judgment:
judgment:-
"8. The learnedrned counsel appearing for the appellant argued that the appellant was wrongly rejected on the spurious ground of her not having a qualification prescribed by the advertisement read with the corrigendum. Learned counsel appearing for the Board and the MCD submit that as per the qualification prescribed in the advertisement and the corrigendum for appointment to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher, the requirement of Hindi at the Secondary level or Senior Secondary level is the essential qualification which h a candidate must possess. According to them, in case a candidate having a Bachelor of Arts degree with Hindi, he/she would not be eligible for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. We fail to see the logic and the rationale of the argument of the learned d counsel for the MCD and the Board. Undoubtedly, Bachelor of Arts degree with Hindi, is a higher qualification than the higher secondary with Hindi.
9. In the counter affidavit filed by the MCD it has not been stated as to how the study of Hindi as a language nguage at higher secondary or intermediate level by the candidates is more relevant than the study of Hindi as a language in BA pass course for the job requirement. Nothing has been brought to our notice by the learned counsel appearing for the Board and tthe MCD which could justify the stand of the respondents that the study of Hindi as a language at higher secondary level by a candidate has a nexus with the object sought to be achieved, which object by the study of Hindi at B.A. level by a candidate cannot be achieved. No study or evaluation or analysis has been placed before us to show that the candidates having Hindi as a subject at the secondary level are better qualified and equipped to teach primary students than the candidates having 74 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Hindi at the graduate uate level. In case the argument of the learned counsel appearing for the MCD and the Board is taken to its logical conclusion it will lead to absurd results. There may be a case where a person did not take up Hindi as a language at higher secondary level and took it up at higher levels, namely, B.A., M.A. and Ph.D. Surely, it can not be said that the person who had taken Hindi as a subject at the Graduate level, Masters level or Doctorate level is less qualified for the job than the person who had taken up Hindi as a subject at the higher secondary level. The counter affidavit of the MCD is not at all helpful for the purpose of coming to the conclusion that there is any valid justification for the stand of the Board and the M.C.D. in considering higher seco secondary with Hindi as an essential requirement for the post of Primary Assistant Teachers. The invidious distinction made by the Board and the MCD for ignoring candidates with higher qualification is unwarranted and without any valid basis.
10. It is significant icant to note that nothing is stated in the counter affidavit as to how Hindi at the Higher Secondary level is helpful for teaching primary level students.
What is so special about Hindi at the secondary level, which attribute Hindi at higher level is lacking king has not been explained in the counter affidavit or the arguments of the learned counsel for the respondents. Hindi as a language has not been mentioned in the advertisement as a special qualification for imparting education to the students at the primary ary level. It cannot be assumed by any stretch of imagination that a candidate possessing higher qualification like B.A. with Hindi or M.A. with Hindi will be less efficient in teaching primary classes than a person possessing lesser qualification such as higher secondary with Hindi.
11. We are supported in our view by a decision of the Allahabad High Court in Laxmi Narayan Yadav Vs. District Inspector of Schools and Ors., 1988 (3) SLR Allahabad 42, in which it was held as follows:-
As regards the eligibility lity of respondent No. 3 for the post of Lecturer in Hindi, the learned counsel for the respondents drew out attention to N.B. (Note)(2) below the rule prescribing 75 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V minimum qualifications for 'Hindi Teachers for Intermediate' contained in Appendix A which provides as follows:
"The Hindi Teachers may not be required to have a Degree in Sanskrit in those institutions where qualified Sanskrit teacher is available to teach the Sanskrit portion of the Hindi Court".
The above note clarifies the intention why B.A B.A. with Sanskrit was kept as an essential qualification for a Hindi Teacher for Intermediate Classes. The person should be such who can also teach Sanskrit portion of the Hindi Course. The qualification prescribed for Sanskrit Teacher for Intermediate' is ''M.A. with Sanskrit preferably trained'. As respondent no. 3 is M.A. in Sanskrit, he is fully qualified to teach Sanskrit also.
Consequently, respondent no. 3 cannot be said to be disqualified for being appointed teacher in Hindi simply because he is not ''B.A. with Sanskrit', especially when he is M.A. in Sanskrit and is qualified to teach Sanskrit portion of Hindi Court, so that requirement of 'B.A. with Sanskrit' is not applicable in his case. Moreover, respondent no. 3 may not be having Sanskrit as a subject ject for his Bachelors' degree.
He is, however, having Master's Degree in Sanskrit, which is certainly a higher qualification than B.A. with Sanskrit. Consequently, the claim of respondent no. 3 could not be rejected merely on the ground that he is not 'B.A. .A. with Sanskrit', when he is admittedly M.A. Sanskrit'."
(Emphasis Supplied)
49. A similar view was taken by a Single Judge of this Court in the decision reported as 186 (2012) DLT 132 Kalpana Pandey v Director of Education & Ors.The aforesaid decision was affirmed by a Division Bench of Court in LPA No.640/2010 'Director of Education v Kalpana Pandey' decided on September 18, 2012."
76Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 5.7. In case of Ruby (supra), decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the petitioners had been selected and their names appeared in the Select List, but at the stage of document verification, some doubts were raised and that is why their names were not considered. It was also noticed noti in Ruby (supra) that:
that:-
"15. That the matter of elucidation of Educational Qualification/Eligibility in respect of the post of Statistical investigator Grade -II II (Post Code C C-33) was also taken up with the Office of Registrar General of India which is the the User Department in respect of the Post in question, In turn, the User Department vide letter No. F.12011/8/1018-AD-
F.12011/8/1018 AD-V dated 17.10.2019 clarified as under:-
under:
"The matter was earlier discussed with UPSC while framing the RR's. A copy of the letter sent to UPSC is placed at Annexure A. It is informed that applicant should have the subject of Statistics at Degree level in Part Part-I, Part- II and Part-III III or in all the six semesters of three years degree course and not simply a paper in any part of the Degree or six semesters at degree level." Copy letter No. F.12011/8/2018 F.12011/8/2018-AD-V dated 17.10.2019 issued by O/o the Registrar General of India is annexed and marked as Annexure -R4."
16. That the Commission is a recruiting agency and conducts examination for recruitmen recruitment of eligible candidates for various posts in accordance with the recruitment rules framed and vacancies reported by User Departments. The Commission obtain/confirms the vacancy position from all the participating Ministries/ Department/ Central Govt. Orga Organizations from time to time. Since, the Applicants herein do not hold requisite Educational Qualifications as per the elucidation of the User Department, they were not found eligible for the post of Statistical Investigator Grade Grade-II (Post Code C-33) 33) during documents verification."
77Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 5.8. When a recruitment rule states ""with" "statistics", it means that the required educational qualification for the position must include the subject of statistics, either as a major, minor, or a significant component of the de degree program in all three years and not just as one of the papers in part of the degree or six semesters at degree level. Essentially, the candidate needs to have studied and demonstrated proficiency in statistics to be eligible for the job. It indicates that a basic understanding of statistical methods and analysis is necessary for the role which is a core requirement of the job.
5.9. The purpose to be ascribed to the legislature is especially important in the context of discretionary powers conferred on public authorities, in view of the doctrine that such powers must be exercised for proper purposes, determined as a matter of statutory interpretation. (Ref: Padfield vs. Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968] AC 997 ).
5.10. Words used in advertisement are in nature of external aid to the RR's, which has created a right. A need for courts is to be slow to permit external aids to displace meanings which are otherwise clear and unambiguous and not productive of absurdity.
78Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 5.11. Terms and conditions as stipulated in the advertisement, that is to say, the stipulation to the effect that "The The candidates must have studied Statistics as a subject in all three years or all the 6 semesters of the graduation course," has not been quest questioned. The applicant(s) who were fully aware of such a stipulation in the advertisement and who participated in the selection process have not challenged said clause. Looking into the nature of the job profile and functional requirements, the words "with statistics"
statistics" must be harmoniously construed to mean and include the candidate having "statistics as one of the subjects" in "bachelor's degree in any subject"
either as a major, minor, or a significant component of the degree program in all three years, irre irrespective of the semester system (which may or may not exist in any university). It is a positive assertion to arrive at a just conclusion that a candidate must possess proficiency in statistics, having regard to the nature of employment, and statistics is required to be studied in all three years and not just as part of or one of the subjects subjects.
5.12 The arguments put forth on behalf of the applicants cannot be accepted since, at the time of issuance of the notice on admission, much reliance has been placed upon the decision rendered by tthis Tribunal 79 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V in Ruby (Supra), (Supra), which has now been quashed and set aside by the Hon'ble High Court. A Review Petition has also been dismissed. What can be best said regarding the arguments by the learned coun counsel for the applicants to now distinguish distinguish the said decision in Ruby ((supra), is a reference to a poem, reading thus:
"When I was One, I had just begun.
When I was Two, I was nearly new.
When I was Three, I was hardly me.
When I was Four, I was not much mo more.
When I was Five, I was just alive.
But now I am six, I'm as clever as clever. So I think I'll be six now forever and ever."
-The End by A. A. Milne."
5.13 In Civil Appeal No. 5233 Of 2025 - Mohit Kumar Vs State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors decided on 15.05.2025, the Apex Court has most recently observed as under:-
under:
"The entire process of recruitment is regulated by statutory rules. Is it open to an aspirant or group of aspirants, who do not comply with the terms of the recruitment notification, to raise questions once the result(s) of selection is/are not palatable to him/them?
It is no longer res integra that terms of an advertisement issued in connection with a selection process are normally not open to challenge unless the challenge is founded d on the ground of breach of Article
16 of the Constitution or, for that matter, Article 14. Once an advertisement is issued inviting applications for public employment, it is the responsibility, nay duty, of an aspirant to read and note the terms and understand rstand what its requirements are. If any aspirant finds any of the terms ambiguous and there is scope 80 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V for an inquiry inbuilt in the advertisement or is provided by any rule/regulation, an effort ought to be first made to obtain clarity for understanding th the requirements accurately. If no such scope is available, nothing prevents the aspirant from seeking clarity by making a representation. Should such clarity be not provided, the aspirant may participate in the process without prejudice to his rights and mamay question the term even after he is not selected. However, if the aspirant does not make any such effort and takes a calculated chance of selection based on his own understanding of the disputed term in the advertisement and later, he emerges unsuccessful unsuccessful, ordinarily, it would not be open to him to challenge the selection on the ground that the disputed term is capable of being understood differently. In such cases, the courts should be loath to entertain such plea of ambiguity while preferring to accept tthe recruiting authority's understanding of the said term. This is for the simple reason that the recruiting authority is the best judge of what its requirements are, and it is such understanding of the recruiting authority that would matter most in cases brought rought up before the courts;
hence, after the commencement of the process wherein aspirants have participated without raising any demur as to what a particular term means, even if any of the terms be ambiguous, the courts should lean in favor of the recruiting ting authority.
21. We are conscious of what this Court observed in paragraphs 15 to 19 of its decision in Meeta Sahai v. State of Bihar(2019) 20 SCC 17 under the heading 'Preliminary Issues'. If the procedure followed by the selecting body/appointing authori authority is such that it is in breach of constitutional safeguards, an aspirant's challenge to the procedure may not be nipped in the bud only on the ground that he has participated in the process. We also read the decision as recognizing that it may not always be possible for an aspirant to foresee any illegality in the procedure followed until such time as the select list is published. In all such cases where the illegality could not have been foreseen, a challenge to the procedure cannot be spurned on the speciousious ground that the aspirant, having participated in the process, has forfeited his right. "
6. The issues have already been settled by the decision rendered dered by the Hon'ble High Court. W We have to only see whether the decision of the respondents to recall the offer of appointment without show cause notice is justified or 81 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V not and whether the applicants have studied statistics as a subject in all three years.
years. These aspects are being dealt with th as under:-
under:
7. Requisition vs. Minutes of the Committee Report 7.1 While we cannot accept the proposition that studying statistics as a subject in an undergraduate program would suffice the requirement of RR's in light of observations made in Ruby (supra (supra).
7.2 Coming to the cases at hand, we have to see whether the applicant(s) have studied statistics as a subject in all three years. The The courts are not experts; we cannot look into the veracity of respective claims even though we have sailed through the submissions and the records of each individual case insofar as material placed on record like mark sheets, degree(s) i.e., ((under-
graduate or postgraduate as well) syllabus, as well as certificates issued by respective universities highlighting that they have studied statistics as a subject in all three years. Minutes of the Committee Report have to be examined on the touchstone of the Rule of Law being followed or not.
7.3 We observe that the applicants who were selected were issued issued offers of appointment, and the cancellation 82 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V of candidature has been done after the document verification process was concluded based on the Committee Report without any show cause for cancellation of candidature or supplying a copy of the Committee's Report.
Report. To that extent only, we have to examine whether the principles of natural justice have been followed or the Rule of Law has been complied with.
7.4 In the matter of Union Public Service Commission vs. M. Sathiya Priya and Ors.
Ors.reported in AIR 2018 Supreme Court 2790, 2790 the following has been observed:
"18.
18. We are conscious of the fact that the expert body's opinion may not deserve acceptance in all circumstances and hence it may not be proper to say that the expert body's opinion is not subject to judicial review in all circumstances. In our constitution constitutional scheme, the decision of the Selection Committee/Board of Appointment cannot be said to be final and absolute." Any other view will have very dangerous consequences, and one must remind oneself of the famous words of Lord Acton: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The aforementioned principle has to be kept in mind while deciding such cases. However, in the matter on hand, it is abundantly clear from the affidavit filed by UPSC that the Selection Committee which is nothing bu but an expert body had carefully examined and scrutinised the experience, Annual Confidential Reports and other relevant factors which were required to be considered before selecting the eligible candidates for IPS. The Selection Committee had in fact scruti scrutinised the merits and demerits of each candidate taking into consideration the various factors as required, and its recommendations were sent to UPSC. It is the settled legal position that the courts have to show deference and consideration to the recommend recommendations of an Expert Committee consisting of members with expertise in the field, if malice or arbitrariness in the Committee's decision is not forthcoming. The doctrine of fairness, evolved in administrative law, was not supposed to convert tribunals and ccourts into appellate authorities over the decision of experts. The 83 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V constraints--self-
constraints imposed, undoubtedly undoubtedly--of writ jurisdiction still remain. Ignoring them would lead to confusion and uncertainty. The jurisdiction may become rudderless."
7.5 An argument has has been advanced on behalf of the applicants that the RR's contemplate word ""Subject", whereas the rejection of the candidature is on the basis of the fact that applicants have not studied Statistics as a "Paper".
"Paper". It has been urged that both words ""Subject"
and "Paper" are not inter-changeable changeable or inter inter-played with. The respondents ought to have examined every individual case to arrive at a conclusion that whether the applicants have studied the Statistics as "Subject" or as a "Paper".
7.6 The word "Subject" refers to the main topic of a discussion, study, or written piece, while "Paper" refers to a written document or report, often related to a particular subject. In simpler terms, the subject is what the paper is about. The "Statistics" is the "Subject"
whereas, illustratively, one can say that "Business Statistics" in one term of examination is one of the "Paper" under the subject heading "Statistics." The 'Subject' is broader and general in terms of the area or field of study, whereas the 'Paper' is a definite and 84 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V specific term of writing that is delved into in a given field of study.
7.7 A Paper is a long, formal piece of writing about
an academic subject "Collins
ns English Dictionary".
However, the decision of the respondent has been arrived at on the premise that the candidates have not studied "Statistics" as a "Paper" rather than "Subject" as contemplated in RR's as well as in the advertisement.
Whether the "Paper"
"Paper" studied by the applicants in all three years, illustrative for one year, i.e., "Business Statistics" may or may not form an integral part of the subject, i.e., "Statistics" has not been looked into.
7.8 There are two sides to every story, and some sides are not recorded or often not offered. To draw a conclusion or make a decision on an erroneous or incomplete picture would always create confusion. Even long-held held beliefs or assumptions can be proven wrong, or if delved into deeper, can shed more lig light on the truth.
To quote J.
J Michael Straczynski:
"Remember, there are always two sides to every story. Understanding is a three-edged three edged sword. Your side, their side, and the truth in the middle. Get all the facts before you jump to conclusions."85
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V The phrase phras "three-edged edged sword" suggests that true understanding is complex and involves considering multiple facets. It includes your own perspective, the other person's perspective, and the objective truth. The quote implies that the truth often resides somewhere between the opposing viewpoints, rather than being solely on one side. It strongly advocates for gathering all the facts before forming a judgment or opinion.
7.9 In the matter of Jasraj Inder Singh vs. Hemraj Multanchand(1977 2 SCR 973 : 1977 2 SCC 155 Multanchand(1977 155, to quote the words of Hon'ble V.R. Krishna Iyer J:
"7.
7. To pick out a single true item which had been inextricably enmeshed in the skein of entries and cross entries was to tear up the fabric of the whole cross-entries truth. In a finer sense, harmony is the beautifu beautiful totality of a whole sequence of notes, and the concord of sweet sounds is ill-tuned ill tuned into disjointed discord if a note or two is unmusically cut and played. Truth, like song, is whole, and half-truth half truth can be noise! Justice is truth, is beauty, and the strategy strategy of healing injustice is the discovery of the whole truth and harmonizing human relations. Law's finest hour is not in meditating on abstractions but in being the delivery agent of full fairness. This divagation is justified by the need to remind ourselves ourselves that the grammar of justice according to law is not a little litigative solution of isolated problems but resolving the conflict in its wider bearings."
7.10 Again in Kishor Singh Ravinder Dev Etc vs. State of Rajasthan 1981 SCR (1) 995 995, while answering the question of whether prison authorities should give an opportunity to be heard before imposing punishment on 86 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V prisoners, Hon'ble V.R. Krishna Iyer Iyer, (J) observed as under:
under:-
"The The moral of this case is poignant: So long as an iron curtain divides the law set by the Constitution and lit by the Supreme Court from the minions of the State, so long shall this Court's writ remain a mystic myth and harmless half-truth half truth making law in the books and law-in-action law action distant neighbours. This shall not be."
be.
After all, the great proposition that inspires the calling of justicing - by the Bench and the Bar alike alike-is best expressed by Dr. Martin Luther King (Jr) in his letter from Alabama Prison:
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly" "
(Emphasis) 7.11 In Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya Nationa National Law University, Lucknow, National Law University Odisha, Cuttack in collaboration with CAN Foundation hosted the '2nd Justice HR Khanna Memorial National Symposium' to commemorate the august persona of Late Justice HR Khanna, Justice J.B. Pardiwala (Hon'ble Judge, Supreme Court) viewing thus :-
:
"Balancing the intent of the majority populace on one hand and meeting the demands of affirming the Rule of Law on the other is an arduous exercise. It requires extreme judicial craftsmanship to walk the tightrope between the two. What would people say - tightrope 'Log kya kahenge, kya sochenge' is an enigma which haunts each and every Judge, every moment whenever he is to pen down a judgment having social ramifications. It is where the conviction, awareness of 87 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V the Constitutional Constitutional values, and conceptual understanding of rule of law of the concerned Judge comes to the fore." Concluding his speech he said " "Judiciary cannot exist independent of society and the interaction is inevitable. But the rule of law is insurmountable insurmountable."
7.12 In the present case, the clarifications from the Universities are two sided so as to verify the claim in certificates issued by two different authorities (Controller of Examination and another Registrar) of the respective university. To o assess eligibility basing its decision on criteria without any material or document(s) when the "Committee" itself was not sure whether runs contrary to the Recruitment Rules/Regulations and advertisements and in the present case, the "Select Committee" cannot be said to be an expert in the said field but an Administrative Committee, who have done exactly this wherein, they reject the candidate(s), which speaks of decision based on recommendation of "Expert Committee". To the contrary, rather the Committe Committee itself The has observed in para 5 "The Chairman of the Committee is of the view that it is very difficult to assess, whether within the subject, how much portion belongs to the subject "Statistics". Further, from the RR's or advertisement, it is also not cle clear, whether the Statistics should be the entire portion or only a part of the paper /subject. Shri Subhash 88 Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V Dasgupta, DRG and Member corroborated this view.
However other three Members of the Committee were not in agreement with the views expressed by the Chairman hairman and Shri Subhash Das Dasgupta, Member of the Committee".
Committee"
7.13 We have nothing more to observe as these remarks themselves make the so called so-called Expert Committee findings non-exhaustive non exhaustive and inconclusive. There is no conclusive proof that the applicants have not studied paper(s) of the subject "Statistics" in all three years, in the form of any document, material, or syllabus. The Committee ought to have been constituted on broad broad-
based parameters consisting of eminent persons in the field of "Statistics."
7.14 We observe that the decision to cancel candidature post-issuance issuance of the offer of appointment, as arrived at by the Committee, is based on half half-truths; i.e., a "half-
truth" is when an affirmative statement on a certain subject is rendered misleading because of omitted information, while a "pure omission" is when a subject matter is simply left out and never commented upon at all.
89Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 7.15 Taking note of the above observations in MOHIT KUMAR (Supra),, we find that the terms and conditions of the advertisement have not been challenged. However, a representation has been made against the cancellation of the offer of appointment without show cause and without supplying a copy of the Committee Report and findings thereto, which have been produced pursuant to the directions of this Tribunal. We find that, in the event there was confusion in the minds of the administrative authorities/Committee regarding where it has been observed that the Committee itself ffound it very difficult to assess whether within the subject, how much portion belongs to the subject "Statistics". Further, from the RR's or advertisement, it is also not clear whether Statistics should be the entire portion or only a part of the paper/subject. Such an exercise ought to have been carried out before sending the requisition, before the initiation of the selection process, or at least before issuing offers of appointment to anyone. To our dismay, goes into the root of the matter, such arbitrary actions and stakes of the careers of candidates cannot be left to mere guesswork.
90Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V
8. CONCLUSION In view of the above analysis and discussions, we dispose of the present O.A.s by passing the following directions:
8.1 We direct the Competent Authority to constitute an Expert Committee consisting of two eminent persons/Professor(s) from the Indian Statistical Institute or any premier institute undertaking statistical courses, with either the Chairman of the respondents himself or any senior member nominated by him, to re re-examine and revisit each individual individual case of the applicant(s) who had been issued offer of appointment(s) and canceled, so as to arrive at a fair and just decision that one has studied statistics as a 'subject' in all the years of undergraduate or postgraduate level, meeting the functional requirements of the organization.
8.2 In the event, advice of the Expert Committee is accepted by the Competent Authority, a fresh offer of appointment shall be issued to the selecte selected candidates who are found to be fit.
8.3 The decision of the Expert Committee shall be binding and final upon the parties.91
Item No. 17 to 43 (except - 19)/C-V V 8.4 The above exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
order 8.5 Pending M.A.s, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
No costs.
8.6 A copy of this order shall be placed in each O.A. for ready reference.
(Dr. Anand S. Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/SG/