Varsha Sirohi vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors

G.S.Sistani, J

CM APPL.3523/2020 (additional documents)

Issue Notice.

Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, learned Standing Counsel for the responent accepts notice.

Additional documents be taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 13427/2019 & CM APPL. No.54476/2019

The present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 13.12.2019 passed by the Central

Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi ('Tribunal', for short) by which the OA No.3650/2018 filed by the petitioner stands dismissed.

With consent of the parties, the present writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal at the admission stage itself.

The petitioner applied for the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary), Post Code 89/17 pursuant to an advertisement No.04/17 notified by respondent

No.2 for which the last date for application was 31.01.2018. The petitioner claims that she made an online application on 15.01.2018 which was duly

received vide registration No.1812199461797262009. It is also claimed that in the month of July 2018, when she was checking the website, the

petitioner noticed that the application status against her registration number showed ""Application Not Received in Board due to Pending Final Submit

by Candidate"". In view of this endorsement, the petitioner made a representation to the respondents on 14.07.2018 and 16.07.2018, which remained

unanswered.

The notification for conducting written examination was issued on the website in September 2018. However, since the petitioner was not issued an

admit card, she approached the Tribunal. By an interim order passed by the Tribunal on 25.09.2018, the petitioner was allowed to appear in the written

examination held on 14.11.2018. The petitioner secured 118.88 marks, i.e. much above the cutoff marks for the OBC category and was declared

successful. When the matter was finally argued, the O.A. was dismissed primarily on the ground that the petitioner had not made an application at all.

The submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner are two-fold. Firstly, it is contended that not only did the petitioner register herself online

on 15.01.2018, but she also submitted her application on the same date ; and if there was any technical glitch, she should not be made to suffer. The

second argument is that even otherwise, since the petitioner had appeared in the examination and had been shortlisted and since vacancies were

available, she should be considered for appointment as an Assistant Teacher (Primary).

Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, learned standing counsel for the respondent has contended that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. The

Tribunal has applied its mind and has noticed that although the petitioner had 'registered' herself on the Online Application Registration System

(OARS) website, she did not make any 'application' for the post. The screenshot, which is relied upon by the petitioner, also shows that no documents

were uploaded at the time of registration ; and merely because she was allowed by the Tribunal to appear for the written examination, no vested right

would be created in her favour. It is also contended by Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat that mere availability of vacancies would not create any right in favour

of the petitioner who had not even applied for the post, since candidates who are on the waiting list, would have to be considered first ; and since no

application of the petitioner is before the respondents, the case of the petitioner cannot be considered by respondent No.2 at all.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Although a disputed question of fact arises before us, namely, as to whether the petitioner had made

an application for the particular post or not, we are inclined to accept the view of the Tribunal for the reason that even the screenshot, which is sought

to be relied upon by the petitioner, makes it clear that the petitioner's application had not been received in the Board "" ... due to Pending Final Submit

by Candidate"". The screenshot relied upon by the petitioner is scanned below:-

The screenshot relied upon by the petitioner also shows that the other documents and signature that were required to be submitted/appended

alongwith the application had also not been uploaded. Thus, in our view, in the absence of a proper and complete application for the particular post

applied for, no right can accrue in the petitioner's favour. Although the error may have been inadvertent on the part of the petitioner, which is

unfortunate, in the absence of any application having been made, no relief can be granted.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending application also stands disposed of.