GOVT. OF NCT DELHI v. DINESH AND ORS

1. The issue in controversy in this writ petition is fully covered by the judgment of this bench in DSSSB v Dinesh Mahawar[1].

2. The respondents are Scheduled Caste[2] candidates, who applied for recruitment Teacher (Primary) in the Municipal Corporation of Delhi[3], pursuant to advertisement 02/2008. The castes to which they belong are, however, certified as Scheduled Castes outside Delhi. The

SC Signing Date:02.11.2024 22:14 respondents sought to avail the benefit of SC reservation while seeking recruitment as Teacher (Primary) in the MCD. As they were registered as SCs outside Delhi, the respondents were not considered for recruitment against the reserve SC vacancies. As they could not meet the merit for the General category candidates, they were not selected.

3. The respondents approached the Central Administrative Tribunal[4] by way of individual Original Applications[5]. The OAs were disposed of, by the learned Tribunal, by order dated 6 November 2013, directing the petitioner DSSSB to consider the case of the respondents and take a recent decision thereon. By orders dated 21 January 2013 and 19 May 2040, the DSSSB rejected the respondents claims.

4. The respondents, therefore, be approached the learned Tribunal by way of OA 913/2016, which stands allowed by the learned Tribunal by the impugned judgement dated 30 July 2019. Aggrieved thereby, the DSSSB has approached this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

5. In allowing the respondents’ OA, the learned Tribunal followed the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bir Singh v Delhi Jal Board[6], specifically reproducing in the following para from the said decision: “61. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to in terms of "the learned Tribunal" OAs

Signing the views expressed in 34 of his opinion. We further hold that so far as the National Capital Territory of Delhi is concerned the pan India Reservation Rule in force is on record with the constitutional scheme relating to services under the Union and the States/Union Territories.”

6. Besides, the issue is also covered by two other Division Bench judgment of this Court in Deepak Kumar v District & Sessions Judge[7] and DSSSB v Vishnu Kumar Badetia[8]. Following these decisions, we have, in our judgment in Dinesh Mahawar, dismissed the writ petition filed by the DSSSB in a case identical to the present.

7. Following the judgment of this Bench in DSSSB v Dinesh Mahawar, this writ petition is also, therefore, dismissed.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.