SUVIDHA YADAV vs GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3722/2024 SUVIDHA YADAV .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pradeep Kumar and Ms. Sanskriti, Advocates versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 17.01.2025 C.HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The petitioner is the unsuccessful applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal1 in OA 1736/20172. 2. Skipping superfluities, the petitioner participated in an examination for recruitment to the post of Trained Graduate Teacher3 [Social Science (Female)]. Two advertisements Nos. 01/2010 with post code 10/10 and 02/2010 with post code 60/10 were issued by the respondent inviting applications for the said post. The petitioner is a 1 “the Tribunal”, hereinafter 2 Suvidha Yadav v GNCTD 3 “TGT”, hereinafter Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJIT WP(C) 3722/2024 Page 1 of 7 KUMAR Signing Date:21.01.2025 20:08:30 candidate belonging to the Other Backward Classes4. 3. The examination was in two tiers. Tier I was the preliminary examination and Tier II was the main examination. The petitioner cleared Tier I under both the Post Codes and was shortlisted for appearing in the Tier II examination but was not selected for the post of TGT. The reason adduced by the respondent Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board5 was that it had fixed cut off marks of 82 in respect of Post Code 10/10 and 80 in respect of Post Code 60/10, whereas the petitioner’s marks in the Tier II examination was admittedly 78. 4. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached the Tribunal by way of the aforesaid OA, from which this petition emanates. The Tribunal has, by the judgm