DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD Vs. NEERAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent had applied for the post of Teacher (Primary) in the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The application was pursuant to an advertisement by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB). Clause 8 of the advertisement prescribed the conditions for invalid applications. It was indicated in the advertisement that the application with any of the deficiencies specified in clause (a) to (o) in the said clause 8 would be treated as invalid and would be summarily rejected. In the present case, clause 8(e) is relevant and that reads as under:-

(2.) The respondent had applied in response to the said advertisement. The respondent belongs to the OBC category. He had submitted his application within time. A Roll Number was also issued to him being 01623760 and he appeared in the examination on 15.02.2009 for selection. The petitioner prepared the merit list and the respondent's name also appeared in the same. The respondent was shown to have secured 118 marks. The last selected OBC candidate had secured 101 marks. It is also the case of the respondent that he had secured more marks than even the last selected candidate under the general category. Despite this, in the final list issued on 07.10.2009, the name of the respondent did not appear.

(3.) An application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 was moved by the respondent to enquire as to why his name had not been included in the Select List. In response to that application, the DSSSB by a letter dated 30.10.2009 informed the respondent that his application has been rejected as being invalid on the ground that he had signed the application in capital letters in English. It is for this reason that his result was not processed for selection. The relevant portion of the said letter dated 30.10.2009 reads as under:-