Judgments – Law declared by the Courts: January 2026

Thursday, January 29, 2026

CAT Directs DSSSB to Appoint Candidate Wrongly Omitted Due to Email Error (Anjana Kumari)

In a significant judgment restoring faith in procedural fairness, the Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench) has directed the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) and the Directorate of Education, GNCTD, to appoint Ms. Anjana Kumari as a Special Education Teacher after her selection was wrongly overlooked due to a typographical error in her email address.

Anjana Kumari, who secured 89.5 marks in the DSSSB exam—well above the 80-mark cutoff for the unreserved category—was denied appointment solely because she could not upload her e-dossier within the stipulated period in 2018. She later discovered, through an RTI, that her result had never been published online nor communicated to her via SMS or email, as required under DSSSB's own guidelines.

The Tribunal, comprising Hon’ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath (Administrative Member) and Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi (Judicial Member), noted that the email sent by DSSSB was incorrectly addressed to a.kumari09@gmai.com instead of gmail.com, making it clear that the candidate was never notified of her result.

Terming the lapse “a question of employment and livelihood,” the Tribunal dismissed DSSSB's contention that such mistakes are inevitable due to the scale of recruitment. The Tribunal cited precedents including DSSSB vs. Mohan Lal Chhedwal (Delhi HC, 2024) and held that such administrative errors cannot be allowed to cost deserving candidates their careers.

Allowing the OA (Original Application), the Tribunal directed DSSSB to accept Anjana Kumari’s e-dossier in hard copy and the Directorate of Education to consider her appointment either against existing vacancies or by creating a supernumerary post. While the order grants all notional benefits including seniority and pay fixation, no arrears will be paid for the past period due to the “No Work, No Pay” principle.

The Tribunal has directed compliance within three months of receiving the certified order.

[Anjana Kumari Vs. GNCTD & Ors., OA No. 2906/2019, CAT, Delhi, DOD – 26.05.2025]

https://advocateanujaggarwal.com/advocateadmin/img/Finalist/2025103017618188332025%20CAT%20-%20Anjana%20Kumari.pdf

https://advocateanujaggarwal.com/notejudgement.php?courtid=3

https://advocateanujaggarwal.com/home.php

Anuj Aggarwal

Advocate

K-17, 2^nd Floor, Jangpura Extension,

New Delhi - 110014

483, Block-2, Lawyers Chambers,

Delhi High Court, New Delhi-110003

Mobile – 9891403206

Landline – 011 - 35554905

Email – anujaggarwal1984@gmail.com

Tuesday, January 13, 2026

Contractual Teachers of MCD Entitled to Equal Pay for Equal Work; Supreme Court Dismisses MCD’s SLP

Contractual Teachers of MCD Entitled to Equal Pay for Equal Work; Supreme Court Dismisses MCD’s SLP

New Delhi, January 12, 2026:

In a significant relief to contractual teachers of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), the Supreme Court of India on Monday dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the MCD, thereby allowing the orders granting equal pay for equal work to contractual teachers to attain finality.

The dismissal of the SLP effectively upholds the decisions of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and the Delhi High Court, which had directed the MCD to pay contractual primary teachers salary at the minimum of the regular pay scale, along with Dearness Allowance and other admissible emoluments, with effect from 1 January 2016.

Background of the Litigation

The contractual teachers, who have been serving the MCD since as early as 2003, had approached the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking parity in pay with regularly appointed teachers, relying upon the constitutional principle of “equal pay for equal work.”

By its order dated 21 May 2025, the CAT allowed the teachers’ application and directed MCD to grant them salary at the minimum of the pay scale applicable to regular teachers, along with arrears. The Tribunal relied upon the landmark Supreme Court judgment in State of Punjab & Ors. v. Jagjit Singh & Ors. (2017).

The MCD challenged the Tribunal’s order before the Delhi High Court, which, by judgment dated 31 July 2025, dismissed the writ petition and held that the Tribunal had rightly applied the law and that contractual teachers performing the same duties as regular teachers could not be denied pay parity.

Supreme Court Proceedings

Aggrieved by the High Court’s decision, the MCD approached the Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition. After hearing the parties, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Tribunal and the High Court. The SLP was accordingly dismissed, thereby confirming the entitlement of contractual teachers to the benefit of equal pay for equal work. The contractual teachers were represented before the Supreme Court by Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate, along with his team of counsel, who successfully defended the impugned judgments in favour of the teachers.

Impact

With the dismissal of the SLP, the legal position stands reaffirmed that long-serving contractual teachers of the MCD, who discharge duties identical to those of regular teachers, are entitled to salary at the minimum of the regular pay scale, reinforcing constitutional guarantees of equality and fairness in public employment.

https://www.advocateanujaggarwal.com/advocateadmin/img/Finalist/2026011317683228802026%20SC%20-%20Merged%20-%20MCD%20Vs.%20Shehnaz%20Parveen.pdf