GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. v. SUSHMA RANI

1. This petition has been filed, challenging the Order dated 09.08.2023 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, the ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 1118/2021, titled Sushma Rani v. GNCT of Delhi & Ors., whereby the said O.A. filed by the respondent herein was allowed with the following directions: “7· It is noted that vide an order dated 17.06.2021, as an interim measure, last appointment to the post of TGT Punjabi (Female) (Post Code 143/2017) under the SC category was made subject to the final outcome of this O.A. The result of the recruitment process in question was declared in the year 2019 and the last selected candidate has been working for the last four years. Therefore, the respondents are directed to comply with the directions of this Tribunal without disturbing the last selected candidate and by creating a supernumerary post, if required, to accommodate the applicant if a situation so arises.”

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioners issued Advertisement No. 04/17 dated 20.12.2017 for filling up 126 vacant posts of TGT (Punjabi)-Female, (Post Code 143/17) in the Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi, through a computer-based online examination. Vide Notice dated 25.01.2019, the petitioners shortlisted 56 candidates, including the respondent, in the Scheduled Caste Category. As per the said notice, the shortlisted candidates were also required to upload their requisite documents in the e-dossier module between 29.01.2019 and 07.02.2019, for which they were to be separately informed by the respondent via SMS and e-mail.

3. By a subsequent Notice dated 04.02.2019, the petitioners admitted that the process for uploading the documents in the e-dossier module could not be opened due to technical reasons and, therefore, they extended the time for uploading the e-dossiers and documents till 13.02.2019.

4. The petitioners, thereafter, claiming that the respondent had failed to upload her documents in the e-dossier within the prescribed time, cancelled her candidature vide Notice dated 30.04.2019.

5. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent submitted representations, including one dated 01.05.2019, wherein she stated that she resides in a very backward colony where there is no cybercafe except only a small shop at home. She further submits that her husband went to the cybercafe on 04.02.2019 to upload the scanned copies of her certificates, and the shopkeeper operating the site informed him that the same had been done. She also asserted that she did not receive any intimation from the petitioners about the non-uploading of the documents. She submitted that it may be due to a technical fault or other reasons that the documents could not be uploaded.

6. Not receiving any reply to these representations, the respondent filed the above O.A.

7. The learned Tribunal allowed the said O.A., observing as under:

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners, placing reliance on an email dated 24.03.2025 from the National Informatics Centre, submits that the respondent had not submitted her e-dossier, because of which her e-dossier number could not be generated. He submits that the login details would clearly show that the respondent logged into the website of the petitioners on 04.02.2019 and then again on 05.02.2019 and 12.02.2019; however, she did not submit her documents. Even the printout relied upon by the respondent shows that her documents were not submitted, as they were not saved on the website by the respondent. He submits that the learned Tribunal has, therefore, erred in concluding that it was due to a technical glitch that the respondent could not upload her documents.

9. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent had successfully participated in the selection process. Given her financial background, there is no reason why she would not upload her documents within the given time. He submits that the technical glitch in the system has been admitted by the petitioners themselves, in their Notice dated 04.02.2019. He submits that, thereafter, no SMS or e-mail communication was sent to the respondent, warning her that her documents could not be uploaded due to this technical glitch. He submits that the respondent remained under a bona fide belief that her documents had been duly uploaded, and it is only subsequent to the rejection notice, that she came to know that her documents had not been uploaded due to a technical glitch in the system of the petitioners. He submits that, therefore, the respondent cannot be made to suffer for the same.

10. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties.

11. Though it is evident that the respondent did not upload her edossier within the given time, it is also evident that she did try to do the same on 04.02.2019. The petitioners themselves admit to the technical glitch because of which documents could not be uploaded in the e-dossier module between the given period from 25.01.2019 to 07.02.2019. The petitioners themselves extended the period for uploading the documents till 13.02.2019, by a Notice dated 04.02.2019. It is not the case of the petitioners that the respondent was informed that her attempts to upload the documents on 04.02.2019 had remained unsuccessful because of this technical glitch.

12. In view of the above facts, we do not deem it appropriate to interfere with the directions issued by the learned Tribunal by its Impugned Order.

13. The petition, along with the pending applications, is accordingly dismissed.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J MADHU JAIN, J DECEMBER 1, 2025/ns/Yg