Delhi High Court (Kshetarpal & Mahajan JJ) disposed of 21 writ petitions, principally by GNCTD/DSSSB (one by a private candidate), against Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench orders on rejection of candidature of candidates who had qualified DSSSB written examinations but failed to upload e-dossiers within prescribed windows. Held: (i) a communication entailing civil consequences is legally effective only when actually communicated; unilateral website upload without proof of receipt is not valid communication, and the electronic nature of the process does not dilute this doctrine; (ii) where the Advertisement, Admit Card and Result Notice promised individual intimation by SMS and email alongside website notices, communication is complete only when both channels operate, giving rise to a legitimate expectation; (iii) an authority adopting individual communication bears the burden of proving effective dispatch, failing which an adverse inference may be drawn against it; (iv) timelines are binding (Articles 14 and 16) but cannot be isolated from effective communication; rejection of a qualified candidate demands firm findings on clear communication, reliable mode, fair opportunity and absence of administrative lapse; procedural rigidity must not defeat substantive justice. Applied: undisputed OARS portal records raised a presumption of due intimation (W.P.(C) 938/2026, 14309/2025, 12996/2024 allowed; 506/2023 allowed as the SMS proof was unverifiable); belated SMS after cut-off, mid-window rectification of an erroneous Result Notice, undated delivery reports, and unproved bulk-SMS claims did not establish due intimation - 17 petitions dismissed; pending applications closed.
