Dismissed¶23

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Anr. v. Parmod Kumar

Delhi HC16 Jan 2026W.P.(C)/10241/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DSSSB v. Parmod Kumar; W.P.(C) 10241/2024 and CM APPL. 42006/2024; High Court of Delhi; decision dated 16.01.2026; Bench: Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan, JJ.; challenge to CAT order dated 27.09.2023 disposing of O.A. No.3067/2016 (in terms of OA No. 1497/2017); recruitment examination held 28.12.2024 for notices of 2012 and 2013; Respondent scored 88.75 against cut-offs 95.5 (2011-12) and 90 (2012-13); CAT direction limited to consideration of candidature subject to merit; liberty to reject below-cut-off candidature; petition dismissed as withdrawn; Department to pass appropriate orders within one month.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to the Petitioners to withdraw the Petition in order to enable the Department to pass appropriate orders within a period of one month; pending application closed. ¶23

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Anr. Vs Parmod Kumar — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission granted to the Petitioners to withdraw the Petition in order to enable the Department to pass appropriate orders within a period of one month; pending application closed.

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the Respondent is entitled to appointment under the CAT's directions despite having obtained marks below the prescribed cut-off in the recruitment examination, or whether the Petitioners may reject a below-cut-off candidature.

¶22

Court's answer

The CAT had only directed the Petitioners to consider the Respondent's candidature for the relevant Post Code(s) subject to his being found in merit; once his marks are below the cut-off, the Petitioners have the liberty to reject his candidature.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the Petitioners was permitted to withdraw the Petition to enable the Department to pass appropriate orders within one month; the Petition was dismissed as withdrawn and the pending application was closed.

¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan, JJ.), order dated 16.01.2026 in W.P.(C) 10241/2024 with CM APPL. 42006/2024: DSSSB challenged the CAT order dated 27.09.2023 disposing of O.A. No.3067/2016 of Parmod Kumar, which had directed consideration of his candidature for the relevant Post Code(s) subject to merit, with notional consequential benefits (seniority and pay fixation from the date of appointment of his immediate junior) but no arrears, the exercise to be completed preferably within 10 weeks. The Court observed that the CAT had merely directed consideration of candidature; since the Respondent scored 88.75 marks against cut-offs of 95.5 (2011-12) and 90 (2012-13) in the common examination held on 28.12.2024, the Board retained the liberty to reject a below-cut-off candidate. The Petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with permission granted to enable the Department to pass appropriate orders within one month; the pending application was closed.

¶1

$~7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 10241/2024 and CM APPL. 42006/2024

¶4

DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD AND ANR .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Aliza Alam, Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

PARMOD KUMAR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sachin Kumar Jain, Adv.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 16.01.2026

¶12

Through the present Petitioner, the Petitioners assails the correctness of the order dated 27.09.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [hereinafter referred to as ‘CAT’], whereby O.A. No.3067/2016 filed by the Respondent was disposed of with the following directions:

¶13

“6. In view of the aforesaid, the present OA is disposed of in terms of OA No. 1497 /2017, as reproduced above, with the following directions: -

¶14

(i) Respondents are directed to consider the candidatures of the applicant for the relevant Post Code(s), subject to the applicant is found in merit and suitable otherwise at the relevant point of time. If on such consideration, the applicant is found suitable the applicant shall be appointed to the relevant post(s).

¶15

(ii) On such appointment, the applicant shall be eligible for consequential benefits, i.e., seniority, fixation of pay from the date when his immediate junior in the relevant merit list has been appointed.

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/01/2026 at 12:42:54

¶18

(iii) However, consequential benefits and fixation of pay shall be on notional basis, the applicant shall not be entitled for any arrears.

¶19

(iv) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the respondents as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 10 weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this Order.”

¶20

This Court has been informed that a common examination was held on 28.12.2024, for two recruitment notices, issued in 2012 and 2013.

¶21

Learned counsel representing the Petitioners submits that the Respondent had obtained 88.75 marks in the recruitment examination against the cut-off of 95.5 marks for the year 2011-12, whereas, he had obtained 88.75 marks against the cut-off of 90 marks for the year 2012-13. Hence, the Respondent is not entitled to appointment.

¶22

It is evident that the CAT has only directed the Petitioners to consider the candidature of the Respondent for the relevant Post Code(s), subject to the Respondent is found in merit. Once the marks obtained by the Respondent are below the cut-off, the Petitioners have the liberty to reject the candidature of the Respondent.

¶23

In view of the aforestated facts, learned counsel representing the Petitioners seeks and is granted permission to withdraw the present Petition in order to enable the Department to pass appropriate orders, within a period of one month.

¶24

The present Petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. The pending application also stands closed.

¶25

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

¶26

AMIT MAHAJAN, J.

¶27

JANUARY 16, 2026 jai/ra

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/01/2026 at 12:42:54

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Anr. v. Parmod Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Anr. v. Parmod Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aecom Technical Services Inc. Vs Income-Tax Officer Ward Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi & Ors.

Rita Pillai Vs Payal Dewangana

Rajeev Ranjan Vederah Vs Reserve Bank of India and Anr.

Shiv Lal & Ors. Vs Central Public Works Department(Cpwd) & Anr.

Vivek Mukherji Vs Union of India & Anr.

Smt Geeta Devi Vs Iifl Home Finance Ltd. & Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Nigam Vs Union of India & Ors.

Indu Rawat Vs Delhi Urban Art Commission & Anr.

Kusum Lata Vs Dr Navlendra Kumar Singh, Addl. Director and Ors.

Delhi Development Authority Vs R. K. Gogia

Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr. Vs Savita Kumari Mann

Union of India Vs Inder Pal

National Institute of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases Vs Ms. Shweta & Ors.

Directorate of Estates Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs Vs Rajiv Sarin & Ors.