DELHI HIGH COURT UPHOLDS OBC CANDIDATE’S RIGHTS, DISMISSES DSSSB’S PETITION IN TEACHER RECRUITMENT CASE
LEGAL
NEWS | DELHI HIGH COURT | SERVICE LAW & RECRUITMENT
New
Delhi, September 2, 2026: In a significant ruling concerning reservation
benefits in public employment, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ
petition filed by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB)
against Lal Chand, an aspirant for the post of Trained Graduate Teacher (Social
Science) in Delhi government schools.
A
Division Bench comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Vinod Kumar
upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision in favour of the
candidate and directed the authorities to declare his result and take
consequential action within eight weeks.
The
judgment, delivered in Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Another
v. Lal Chand, W.P.(C) No. 6450/2025, addresses an important question concerning
the eligibility of Other Backward Classes (OBC) candidates whose caste
certificates were initially issued on the basis of family documents from
another State and subsequently corrected by the Delhi authorities.
The
Court examined the effect of the Delhi Government’s Office Memorandum dated May
31, 2021, on recruitment conditions requiring an OBC certificate to have been
issued on the basis of an earlier certificate held by a close family member.
Candidate
Scored Above the OBC Cut-Off but Faced Rejection
The
dispute arose from a recruitment advertisement issued by DSSSB in May 2021 for
the post of TGT (Social Science), Male, under Post Code 39/21. The recruitment
covered 469 vacancies, including 116 reserved for OBC candidates.
Lal
Chand, who belongs to the Teli community, had initially obtained an OBC
certificate from the Government of NCT of Delhi on January 12, 2016. The
certificate was based on an earlier caste certificate issued to his father in
Uttar Pradesh.
According
to the case chronology, Lal Chand secured 112.08 marks out of 200 in the
recruitment examination, substantially higher than the 95.91 marks recorded for
the last provisionally selected OBC candidate.
However,
DSSSB rejected his candidature on April 28, 2022, observing that his original
OBC certificate referred to a community recognised in Uttar Pradesh and that
his subsequently issued Delhi OBC certificate was dated February 7, 2022, after
the recruitment cut-off date.
Lal
Chand maintained that he belonged to a community recognised as OBC in Delhi and
that the corrected certificate had been obtained from the competent Delhi
authorities following DSSSB’s opportunity to rectify deficiencies in
candidates’ documents.
Central
Administrative Tribunal Granted Relief
Aggrieved
by the rejection, Lal Chand approached the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Principal Bench, New Delhi, through Original Application No. 1669/2022.
On
July 5, 2024, the Tribunal allowed his application. DSSSB and another authority
subsequently challenged the Tribunal’s decision before the Delhi High Court by
filing W.P.(C) No. 6450/2025.
The
principal dispute before the High Court concerned whether the recruiting
authorities could insist upon the older family-certificate requirement despite
the subsequent policy clarification issued by the Delhi Government.
Delhi
Government’s 2021 Clarification Proves Decisive
A
central feature of the judgment was the Office Memorandum issued by the
Services Department of the Government of NCT of Delhi on May 31, 2021.
The
memorandum clarified that a candidate possessing an OBC (Delhi) certificate
issued by the Delhi Revenue Department, certifying membership of a community
notified as OBC in Delhi, would be entitled to reservation benefits even where
the certificate did not mention an earlier caste certificate issued to the
candidate’s father, siblings or paternal uncles.
The
Division Bench examined this clarification while considering the validity of
Lal Chand’s certificate dated February 7, 2022.
The
Court rejected the recruiting authorities’ objection that the certificate was
deficient merely because it did not establish the earlier family-certificate
linkage prescribed in the recruitment advertisement.
In
paragraphs 47 and 48 of its judgment, the Court held that the requirement of an
old certificate issued to a close relative could no longer be insisted upon in
view of the May 31, 2021 memorandum.
The
Bench observed:
“The
requirement of the certificate having been issued on the basis of the old
certificate issued to a close relative of the respondent would stand eschewed
in view of OM dated 31 May 2021.”
The
judgment also treated the memorandum as a clarification capable of
retrospective application, referring in the connected proceedings to the
Supreme Court's decision in Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit v. Manu,
(2023) 19 SCC 30.
High
Court Dismisses DSSSB’s Challenge
Finding
no justification to interfere with the Tribunal’s order, the Division Bench
dismissed DSSSB’s writ petition.
In
paragraphs 49 to 51, the Court concluded:
“We,
therefore, do not find this to be a case to interfere with the impugned order
passed by the Tribunal.”
The
Court further directed:
“Let
the respondent’s result be declared and consequential action be taken within
eight weeks from today.”
The
ruling preserves the relief granted to Lal Chand by the Central Administrative
Tribunal and requires the authorities to take consequential steps in accordance
with the judgment.
Importantly,
the High Court did not record that Lal Chand had already been appointed. Its
direction concerns declaration of the result and consequential action within
the stipulated period.
Judgment
Holds Significance for Government Job Aspirants
The
decision is important for candidates seeking OBC reservation benefits in
recruitment to civil posts under the Government of NCT of Delhi.
It
reinforces the legal significance of the Delhi Government’s May 31, 2021
clarification and restricts the rejection of an OBC (Delhi) certificate solely
on the ground that it does not refer to an earlier caste certificate issued to
a close family member.
The
ruling is particularly relevant to candidates who possess certificates issued
by the competent Delhi authorities but face objections arising from the origin
of their family's earlier caste documentation.
At
the same time, the judgment does not dispense with every eligibility
requirement relating to OBC reservation or establish that all certificates
obtained after a recruitment cut-off date must automatically be accepted. The
Court's decision turns on the applicable Delhi Government clarification and the
circumstances of the cases before it.
The
judgment was delivered as part of a group of connected recruitment disputes
concerning OBC reservation and caste certificates.
Advocates
Appearing for Lal Chand
Lal
Chand was represented before the Delhi High Court by Advocate Anuj Aggarwal,
along with a team of advocates.
As
recorded in the appearance section of the judgment, the advocates for Lal Chand
were: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Mr. Nikhil Pawar, Mr. Shubham Bahl, Ms. Kritika Matta,
Ms. Tanya Rose, Ms. Bhumica Kundra, Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Mr. Lovekesh, Ms. Anjali
Bansal, Mr. Manas Verma and Mr. Shakib Malik.
The
judgment was pronounced on September 2, 2026, by the Division Bench of Justice
C. Hari Shankar and Justice Vinod Kumar.
Case
reference: Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Another v. Lal Chand,
W.P.(C) 6450/2025, Delhi High Court, judgment dated September 2, 2026. Relevant
paragraphs: 41–51.
Anuj
Aggarwal & Company
Advocates
OFFICE
ADDRESS
K-17,
2nd Floor, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi – 110014
DELHI
HIGH COURT CHAMBER
483,
Block-II, Lawyers Chambers, Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003
9891403206
anujaggarwal1984@gmail.com
anujaggarwalcompany@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment