AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Manish Garg, M ember (J)
In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, the applicants have prayed for the following relief(s):
“(i) direct the Respondents to grant to the Applicants age relaxation for the purposes of participation in selection process advertised vide Advertisement No.06/2025 dated 24.05.2025, thereby allowing them to submit their application forms offline as also online before the last date of hearing i.e. 12.06.2025, in terms of the directions vis-à-vis contractual employee as laid down by a catena of judgements;
(ii) direct the Respondents to accept the offline application form/hard copy of the Application from the Applicants;
(iii) direct the Respondents to accord the benefit of additional marks commensurate with the number of years of service of the Applicants on contract asdirected by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in University of Delhi and Ors. Vs. Delhi University Contract Employees Union [MANU/SC/0214/22021]; and Ors.
(iv) accord all consequential benefits thereafter;
(v) award cost of the proceedings;
(vi) pass any other order as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and allow cost in favour of the Applicant.”
Learned counsel for the applicants, while pressing for urgent interim relief, submits that although the applicants except applicant no. 2 are overaged in terms of the eligibility criteria prescribed in the advertisement, there exists a mechanism for age relaxation as per the prevailing policy. He contends that the applicants have been serving on a contractual basis with the Respondent Department, namely the Directorate General of Training (DGT), and therefore are entitled to age relaxation corresponding to their contractual service period. He further submits that the applicants attempted to submit their applications online. However, they were unable to do so due to the software categorizing their experience as non-teaching, while the advertised posts pertain to teaching positions. He argues that the applicants should have been permitted to apply under the teaching category, but due to a technical glitch in the online portal, their applications could not be processed. It is his submission that this amounts to a procedural irregularity, which should not bar the applicants from participating in the selection process and, therefore, without prejudice to their rights and contentions, the applicants may be allowed to submit their applications and be permitted to appear in the examination.
Learned counsel for the respondents, opposing the prayer for relief, submits that the present Original Application is not maintainable, as the issue of age relaxation falls within the exclusive domain of the executive, and no judicial direction may be issued in this regard. He further submits that thee applicants do not fulfill the eligibility criteria as laid down in the advertisement, and hence, are not entitled to participate in the selection process. It is also his submission that the online application process has been designed and implemented in a foolproof manner, without any ambiguity, and that the system rightly rejected the applications of the applicants due to their noon-teaching field experience, which does not match the advertised teaching posts.
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 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 to 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 due to system limitations. This issue requires examination by the respondent authority, especially as the advertised posts relate to teaching.
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 objection regarding non-teaching experience. The applicants’ forms shall be considered in accordance with the eligibility conditions prescribed in the advertisement for teaching posts.
The present Original 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 at a later stage, in accordance with law. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.