Anil Kumar Meena vs Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) & Others

R.N. Singh, Member (J)

(Through Video Conferencing)

1, In the present Original Application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“(i) Set aside the impugned letter/reply dated 22.06.2021 given by the respondent No.1 wherein it has wrongly been informed to the applicant that

his E-dossier has not been forwarded to the respondent No.2 as his name has not appeared in the list of provisionally selected candidates;

(ii) direct the respondent No.1 i.e. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) to select/nominate the applicant for appointment on the post

of Foot Constable (Male) (Post Code 44/13) in Transport Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi and forward his e-dossier to the Transport Department

for the purpose of appointment;

(iii) direct the respondent No.2 i.e. Transport Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi to consider the candidature of the applicant for appointment on the

post of Foot Constable (Male) (Post Code 44/13) with effect from the date when his counterparts were appointed with all the consequential benefits

thereof including seniority, back wages/salary, etc.;

(iv) Allow the present Original Application with costs in favour of the applicant; and

(v) Pass any other Order as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in the favour of the applicant.â€​

The applicant’s grievances, as raised in the present OA, are that the applicant was one of the candidates for the post of Foot Constable (Male)

in the Transport Department and the selection for the post was conducted by the DSSSSB. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the results

were published by the Board on 25.11.2019 and his roll number figured at serial no.1 under the Scheduled Tribe category but under Right to

Information Act, the applicant was informed vide impugned letter dated 22.06.2021 that his name does not figure in the selected or recommended

candidates and therefore, his e-dossier was not forwarded to the user department.

Today, learned counsel for the respondents under instructions submits that the candidature of the applicant has been considered and final decision

has been taken by the respondents vide notice No.1335 dated 30.7.2021, a copy of which has been uploaded on the website of the Board. Vide the

said communication dated 30.7.2021, the applicant has been informed that his candidature has been cancelled and he also stands debarred. Shri

Aggarwal, learned counsel for the applicant submits that a copy of the said communication dated 30.7.2021 has not been supplied to the applicant. Shri

Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents undertakes to supply a copy of the same during the course of the day to the learned counsel for

the applicant and also file with the Registry of the Tribunal during the course of the day.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the OA is disposed of with liberty to the applicant to take appropriate legal remedies, if so advised, in

accordance with law. No costs.

Pending MA also stands disposed of accordingly.