High CourtsDivision Bench(2025) 07 DEL CK 2035

Jagdeep vs Staff Selection Commission & Ors.

Delhi High Court · Decided on 31 July 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Navin Chawla, J · Madhu Jain, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 8251/2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 383 words

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

1.

This petition has been filed challenging the Order dated 02.05.2023, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 499/2018, titled Jagdeep v. Staff Selection Commission & Ors., disposing of the said O.A. filed by the petitioner herein with the following directions:

“4.

Further, Respondent No.1 shall verify if the applicant had been interviewed and if so, his result shall be declared and if found actual and otherwise eligible, send the same to the user Department. In case the applicant is finally appointed, he shall be given seniority along with his batch mates and pay fixation shall also be granted on notional basis with effect from his immediate junior in the said examination. However, no back-wages or arrears, etc. shall be paid to the applicant.”

2.

The review filed by the petitioner against the above order was dismissed by the learned Tribunal vide Order dated 12.12.2023. The same has also been challenged by way of the present petition.

3.

The limited grievance of the petitioner against the Impugned Order is that the learned Tribunal has directed that the result of the petitioner would be declared only if he had been interviewed and was found to be successful in the same.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the interview was not a part of the selection process.

5.

In our Order dated 09.07.2025, this Court had directed the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 to seek instructions on the above submission.

6.

On 18.07.2025, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1, after seeking instructions, had stated that the Interview-cum-Personality Test was not prescribed as a part of the selection process.

7.

Today, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1, on instructions from Mr.Ashish Chaudhary, Under Secretary, SSC-NR, submits that the result of the petitioner shall be declared within a week, without insisting on his participation in any Interview-cum-Personality Test.

8.

In view of the above statement, nothing survives in the present petition. The impugned order dated 02.05.2023 of the learned Tribunal shall stand modified to the above extent. Needless to state that the other directions of the learned Tribunal shall be complied with by the respondents.

9.

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.