Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Rita Kumari vs Dsssb on 15 October, 2025
Item No.10 (Court--4) O.A. No. 3957/2025
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 3957/2025
WITH
M.A. No. 4451/2025
This the 15th day of October
October, 2025
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)
1. Rita Kumari Aged about 35 years D/o Sh. Shashi Bhushan
Sah R/o
R B-l/19C,
l/19C, Bharat Vihar, Kakrola, Dw
Dwarka, Sec-15,
New Delhi-110078
Delhi
2. Rohit Rana Aged about 35 years H. No. - 29B, Bhuran
Pana, Khera Kalan, North West Delhi - 110082
3. Kavita Aged about 35 years D/o Sh. Dharam Pal R R/io D-
56. A-2,
A 2, Rajiv Nagar, Begumpur, Delhi
Delhi-11 0086
4. Ashwani Kumar Aged about 32 years S/o Sh. Rajesh
Kumar R/o
R H. No. 643, Sector-04,
04, Panchkula, Haryana
...Applicants
(By Advocate: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal)
Versus
1. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB)
Through its Chairman Govt. of NCT of Delhi, FC-I8,
Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi
Delhi-110092 Email:
[email protected]
2. Directorate of Education Through its Director, Govt. of
NCT of Delhi, Old Secretariat Building, Civil Lines, Delhi
Delhi-
11 0054 Email: [email protected]
3. The Hon'ble
Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor of Delhi Govt. of NCT
of Delhi, 6 Raj Niwa Marg, Ludlow Castle, Civil Lines, New
Delhi 110054 Email: [email protected]
Delhi-
4. Government of NCT
N T Delhi Through its Chief Secretary
Old Secretariat Building, Civil Lines, Delhi
Delhi-110054 Email:
[email protected]
...Respondents
(By Advocates:
Advocate Mr. Amit Anand with Mr. Tanmay Vasishtha)
Page 1 of 7
Item No.10 (Court--4) O.A. No. 3957/2025
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J):-
M.A. No.4451.2025 No. The present M.A. is filed seeking permission of joining together in a single application.
2. For the reasons stated therein, the M.A. No.4375/2025 is allowed allowed.
O.A. No.3957/2025
3. In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants have prayed for the following relief(s):
r "i. Set aside the impugned Advertisement No. 05/2025 dated 10.09.2025, issued by DSSSB to the extent it fails to grant three years' agerelaxation to the applicants for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) in Directorate of Education, Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi [Post Code: 802/2025];
ii. Set aside the impugned Notification dated 16.05.2013, issued by the respondents, whereby Recruitment Rules for the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) in Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi were notified, to the extent the respondents fail to grant three years' age relaxation to the applicants for appointment on the said post;
iii. Direct the respondents to grant three years' age relaxation to the applicants for appointment on the post of As Assistant Teacher (Primary) in Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi [Post Code: 802/2025] and thereafter consider the candidature of the applicants for the said post treating the applicants as within the upper age limit for the said post;
iv. Allow Allow the present Original Application in favour of the applicants; and v. Pass any other Order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit in the interest of justice and in the favour of the applicant."
4. Learned counsel for the applicant also prays for interim relief in terms of para 9 of the O.A., which reads as under: Page 2 of 7
Item No.10 (Court--4) O.A. No. 3957/2025 "Direct the respondents to accept the application forms (online or offline) of the applicants for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) in Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi [Post Code: 802/2025] and allow the applicants to participate in the recruitment process for the said post."
5. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final adjudication.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants applicants submits that the present Original Application has been filed assailing the Advertisement No. 05/2025 issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) on 10.09.2025 for recruitment to the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) (Post Code:
Code: 802/2025) in the Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, to the extent the respondents have failed to grant three years' age relaxation to the applicants.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants also places reliance upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Sachin & Ors. vs. CRPF & Anr., Anr., W.P.(C) No. 90/2023 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in High Court of Delhi vs. Devina Sharma Sharma, Civil Appeal No. 2016/2022, wherein the courts granted relaxation in upper age limits to candidates who had become overage due to non non-holding of recruitment examinations on time. It is, therefore, submitted that the applicants are entitled to three years' age relaxation as a one one-time measure to enable them to participate in the ongoing recruitment process for the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary). Thus, learned counsel for the applicant presses for urgent interim relief in terms of Page 3 of 7 Item No.10 (Court--4) O.A. No. 3957/2025 para 9 of the original or ginal application by allowing the applicants to submits the application forms forms (online or offline) for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) in Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi [Post Code: 802/2025] and allow the applicants to participate in the recruitment process for the said post as the respondents' respondents' inaction in denial of age relaxation would amount to perpetuating injustice upon qualified candidates solely for the administrative delays attributable to the respondents themselves.
8. Opposing the grant of interim relief, learned counsel for the respondents pondents submits that the Original Application itself is not maintainable, as no cause of action has arisen in favour of the applicants. He further contends that the Recruitment Rules do not provide for any age relaxation beyond what is expressly stipulate stipulated therein, and that the examination is being conducted strictly in accordance with the prescribed rules.
9. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the respondents places reliance upon the judgments ren rendered by the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh WP(C) No. 2440/2023 titled Mridulla Kirti & Ors. vs High Court of J&K and Ladakh & Ors. dated 04.10.2023, The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmadabad R/Special Civil Application No. 11819/2022 with Civil Application (For Direction) No. 2 of 22023 in R/Special Civil Page 4 of 7 Item No.10 (Court--4) O.A. No. 3957/2025 Application No. 11819 of 2022 titled Anuradha Vikramsinh Rajput vs. Gujarat Subordinate Services Selection Board (Gaun Seva Pasandgi Mandal) dated 19.05.2023, and The High Court of Judicature at Patna titled Shahjahan vs. The Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Patna and anr., anr. which, according to him, have distinguished the decisions rendered in High Court of Delhi vs. Devina Sharma and Sachin & Ors. vs. CRPF & Anr Anr., relied upon by the applicants.
10. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the judgments cited by the respondents are clearly distinguishable on facts, as in the present case, the respondents themselves have failed to conduct timely recruitments for several years, thereby rendering the applicants overage overage through no fault of their own. It is urged that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Devina Sharma (supra) and the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Sachin & Ors. (supra) squarely applies to the present case, entitling the applicants to three years' age relaxation as a one one-time measure in the interest of justice.
11. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn our attention to Learned the fact that in an identical situation in O.A O.A. No.2271/2025, this Tribunal vide order dated 10.06.2025 passed the following directions directions:
Page 5 of 7
Item No.10 (Court--4) O.A. No. 3957/2025 "4. Having heard the learned counsel for both parties and with the consent of the parties, this Tribunal dispose of the matter at the admission stage itself. On consideration sideration of the submissions, this Tribunal is of the view that the limited grievance of the applicants deserves sympathetic consideration, particularly in light of the claim that the rejection of their application forms was not due to age bar but owing too a technical error in the software, which failed to recognize their eligibility under the teaching category. It is observed that the applicants have claimed to possess relevant experience, albeit categorized under non-teaching teaching due to system limitations. T This issue requires examination by the respondent authority, especially as the advertised posts relate to teaching.
5. In view of the above, this Tribunal deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to accept the application forms of the applicants in both online and offline modes. The respondents shall also take steps to facilitate the submission and acceptance of the online forms, notwithstanding the system-generated generated objection regarding non non-
teaching experience. The applicants' forms shall be consi considered in accordance with the eligibility conditions prescribed in the advertisement for teaching posts.
6. The present Original Application is, accordingly, disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to the respondents to permit the applicants ants to participate in the selection process, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either party, which may be raised and considered at a later stage, in accordance with law. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs."
12. Learned counsel for the applicant applicants also relies upon the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No.2130/2025 dated 13.10.2025.
13. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the grant of relief and seeks some time to file appropriate appropriate reply. She submits that the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No.2271/2025 dated 10.06.2025 does not confer any equitable rights to the applicants seeking the identical benefits.
14. Having heard counsel for the parties and perusing the pleadin pleadings available on record, we are of the opinion that in an identical matter Page 6 of 7 Item No.10 (Court--4) O.A. No. 3957/2025 in O.A. No.2271/2025 & 2130/2025, 2130/2025, this Tribunal has already passed the appropriate orders.
orders. Therefore, this Court cannot take a divergent view in the present matter.
15. In view of the above, this Tribunal deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to accept the application forms of the applicants in both online and offline modes. The respondents shall also take steps to facilitate the submission and acceptance of the online forms, forms, notwithstanding the system system-generated objection regarding non-teaching non teaching experience. The applicants' forms shall be considered in accordance with the eligibility conditions prescribed in the advertisement for teaching posts.
16. The present Original Application Application is, accordingly, disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to the respondents to permit the applicants to participate in the selection process, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either party, which may be raised and considered considered at a later stage, in accordance with law. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Dr. Anand S Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/sb/
Page 7 of 7