Full Judgment Text
$~41
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 8522/2021 & C.M.Nos.26389-26391/2021
DIVYAM SHEKHAWAT ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jaideep Singh, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Farman Ali and Mr. Athar Raza
Farooquei, Advocates.
th
% Date of Decision: 17 August, 2021
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
J U D G M E N T
MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)
1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the rejection
th th
notification dated 27 July, 2021 and Advertisement dated 08 September,
2020 to the extent it requires the provisional certificate to be issued before
st
01 April, 2021 for entry to Short Service Commission [SSC]- 56 (T).
Petitioner also seeks direction to the respondents to grant the petitioner
joining of Technical Entry, SSC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Petitioner graduated
with a B.Tech. degree from SRM Institute of Science and Technology in
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 8522/2021 Page 1 of 4
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.08.2021
21:00:55
June, 2021 instead of April 2021 because of delays caused due to COVID-
19 pandemic. He states that though the Petitioner had secured Rank 17 in the
All India Merit List out of a vacancy of 40, yet, the respondents cancelled
th
his candidature for the 56 course, SSC (Technical), Chennai only on the
ground that the provisional certificate of his final degree was issued by his
th st
University on 10 June, 2021 instead of being issued earlier between 1 Feb,
st
2021 and 1 April, 2021. He further states that the Petitioner’s college was
following the guidelines that were issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu
nd
including order dated 22 March, 2021 vide which the Government had
asked all the Educational Institutions to only conduct classes and complete
rd st
internal and practical exams between 23 March, 2021 to 31 March, 2021.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also states that the impugned
notification has been issued in violation of principles of natural Justice as
the Petitioner’s admission was cancelled without issuing him a show-cause
notice or giving him an opportunity of hearing. He states that the Petitioner’s
representation to Respondent No. 3, Directorate General of Recruiting was
not accepted. In support of his submission, he relies upon the judgment of
the Supreme Court in National Medical Commission vs. Mothukuru Sriyah
Koumudi and Ors., 2020 SCC OnLine SC 992.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the
view that recruitment process to SSC cannot be brought to a standstill just
because educational institutions are delaying issuance of degrees due to
Covid-19 guidelines. This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that there
are many educational institutions which routinely delay issuance of degrees
and if the time for furnishing the degrees is extended in the present case, it
will have to be extended in all other cases. Accordingly, if the argument
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 8522/2021 Page 2 of 4
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.08.2021
21:00:55
advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is to be accepted, it may
mean that the recruitment process of the Indian Army would never come to
an end!
6. Undoubtedly, stipulation of any cut-off date for furnishing any
certificate may operate inequality against a few individuals but that cannot
be a ground for setting aside the stipulation on that ground. In any event, the
petitioner has the option to sit in the next year exam.
st
7. Moreover, the date of 01 April, 2021 for furnishing the proof of
passing degree exam had been stipulated in the advertisement and the
petitioner having participated in the recruitment process pursuant to the said
advertisement cannot subsequently challenge it.
8. Further, in National Medical Commission (supra), the dispute before
the High Court was whether the student had approached the respondent
0th
No.2-college before the last date prescribed for admission i.e. 3 July,
2020. The High Court, in the said case, after considering the entire material
on record had concluded that the student had visited the college and had paid
9th
the university fees on 2 July, 2020. The High Court also held that
respondent No.2-college had intentionally and illegally denied admission to
student to GS-MS (General Surgery) seat for the academic year 2020-2021
year. Accordingly, the question that arose for consideration before the
Supreme Court whether the High Court was right in directing creation of an
additional seat for the academic year 2020-2021 for granting admission to
the said student. The Apex Court after referring to its judgment in S.
Krishna Sradha vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, 2019 SCC OnLine SC
1609 directed the respondent No.2-college to grant admission to the student
in the next academic year i.e. 2021-2022 and directed payment of
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 8522/2021 Page 3 of 4
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.08.2021
21:00:55
compensation of Rs.10 lacs to be paid by respondent No.2-college.
Consequently, the judgment of the Supreme Court in National Medical
Commission (supra) has no application to the facts of the present case
9. Also, there must be many similarly placed candidates who may not
have even applied under the advertisement knowing very well that they
st
would not be able to furnish proof of passing the degree exam by 01 April,
2021. Consequently, if relief is granted to the petitioner, it would amount to
discrimination against similarly placed law-abiding candidates.
Accordingly, the present writ petition being bereft of merit is dismissed
along with pending applications.
10. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be
also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.
MANMOHAN, J
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
AUGUST 17, 2021
AS
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 8522/2021 Page 4 of 4
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.08.2021
21:00:55