Staff Selection Commission vs Hari Mohan Sharma
- Court
- Delhi High Court
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment reserved on: 09.03.2026
Judgment pronounced on: 11.05.2026
Judgment uploaded on: 11.05.2026
+ W.P.(C) 9332/2025, CM APPL. 39502/2025, CM APPL.
39506/2025
STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ankur Mittal, CGSC and
Mr. Aviraj Pandey, Advocate.
versus
HARI MOHAN SHARMA .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Esha Mazumdar and Ms.
Muskan Sharma, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
J U D G M E N T
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.:
1. By way of the present petition, the Petitioner prays for quashing
of the Order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the Central Administrative
Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as
„Tribunal‟], whereby the Original Application (O.A.) filed by the
Respondent, seeking consideration and acceptance of his candidature
under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category, came to be
allowed.
2. In order to comprehend the issues falling for the adjudication of
this Court, relevant facts in brief are required to be noticed.
3. The Respondent herein, pursuant to the Recruitment Notice dated
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 1 of 17
01.09.2023, applied for the post of Constable (Executive) Male
[hereinafter referred to as „relevant post‟] in Delhi Police Examination
for the year 2023 under the EWS category. Consequent thereto, he
participated in the selection process and upon clearing the written
examination as well as the completion of Physical Endurance and
Measurement Test (PE&MT), was permitted to proceed with the
subsequent stages of document verification and medical examination.
4. At the stage of document verification, it is the case of the
Petitioner that, the Respondent failed to furnish a valid EWS certificate
issued on or before the stipulated cut-off date, i.e., 30.09.2023, and
pertaining to the relevant financial year, as mandated under the
Recruitment Notice. In view of such non-compliance, his candidature
was treated under the unreserved (UR) category, in accordance with
Clause 6.4 of the Recruitment Notice.
5. Subsequently, the final result against the relevant post was
declared on 24.01.2024, however, the Respondent‟s name was not
found in the selection list. Aggrieved thereby, the Respondent
submitted a representation along with EWS certificates issued in the
year 2019, 2023 and 2024, seeking reconsideration of his candidature.
However, the said representation was rejected by the Petitioner vide
communication dated 04.03.2024, on two primary grounds, namely,
that the Respondent had produced an EWS certificate dated 02.09.2019
at the time of document verification, which did not satisfy the requisite
criteria of the certificate being issued on or before the prescribed cut-off
date for the relevant financial year, and that he had failed to secure the
requisite marks under the UR category.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 2 of 17
6. Assailing the aforestated rejection, the Respondent filed an O.A.
before the Tribunal, seeking quashing of the rejection letter dated
04.03.2024, and a consequential direction for inclusion of his name in
the result dated 24.01.2024. The Tribunal after hearing the parties,
allowed the O.A., observing, inter alia, that the Respondent admittedly
was in possession of the requisite EWS certificate prior to the cut-off
date, i.e., 30.09.2023. It is against this decision of the Tribunal that the
Petitioner had sought the indulgence of this Court.
7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and,
with their able assistance, perused the paperbook. However, before
adverting to the rival submissions advanced by the parties, we deem it
appropriate to reproduce the relevant extracts of the Recruitment
Notice, Standing Order of Delhi Police and e-admit card, which form
the bedrock of arguments advanced on behalf of the Petitioner. The
relevant extracts are as follows:
Recruitment Notice dated 01.09.2023
Constable (Executive) Male and Female in Delhi Police Examination-
2023
Dates for submission of online
applications
01-09-2023 to 30-09-2023
Last date and time for receipt of
online applications
30-09-2023 (2300 hours)
Last date and time for making
online fee payment
30-09-2023 (2300 hours)
Dates of „Window for Application
Form Correction‟ and online
payment of Correction Charges.
03-10-2023 to 04-10-2023
(2300 hours)
Schedule of Computer Based
Examination
December, 2023
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 3 of 17
6. Process of certification and format of certificates:
6.1 Candidates who wish to be considered against reserved vacancies or
seek age-relaxation are required to submit requisite certificate from the
competent authority, in the prescribed format (wherever specified)
whenever such certificates are sought by Delhi Police for document
verification. Otherwise, their claim for SC/ ST /OBC /EWS, etc category
will not be entertained and their candidature/ applications will be
considered under General (UR) category. Further, if the candidate has
sought any other age-relaxation and is not able to produce the relevant
certificate, he/ she will be considered in his/ her respective category i.e.
SC/ ST/ OBC/ EWS/ UR. The formats of the certificates are annexed with
the Notice of Examination.
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
6.4 Candidates applying under EWS category must be in possession of
valid EWS certificate as per Annexure-VII issued on or before the
crucial date. The crucial date for this purpose will be closing date of
receipt of online applications. The EWS certificate issued after crucial
date/closing date but valid for the financial year will not be acceptable
and such candidates will be considered under UR category .
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
15. Document Verification :
15.1 All the candidates shortlisted on the basis of their performance in the
Computer Based Examination and who qualify all the events of PE&MT
(i.e. race, long/high jump and physical measurement) are required to
appear for Document Verification along with the photocopies and original
documents as mentioned at Para no: 15.3. Document Verification will be
conducted by Delhi Police.
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
16. Mode of Selection:
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
16.8 Document verification (i.e. collection of required eligibility
certificates/documents from the candidates and their verification with
original documents) will be conducted by Delhi Police at the time of
PE&MT for the candidates who qualify all the events of PE&MT.
Standing Order No. HRD/04/2022 issued by the Delhi Police
“Note 2:
Candidates seeking reservation benefits for SC/ST/EWS must ensure that
they are entitled to such reservation as per eligibility on the crucial date.
They should also possess the caste/community certificate. The crucial date
for this purpose will be the closing date of receipt of online applications.
The formats of certificates are annexed as Annexure-E & F.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 4 of 17
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
23. PE&MT and checking of the original documents/certificates to verify
eligibility criteria
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
xiii) All the original documents/certificates pertaining to age, education,
SC/ST/OBC/ EWS , Hill areas, NOC Discharge Certificate (in case of
Ex.SM), sports certificate, ward certificate issued to wards
(sons/daughters) of Delhi Police personnel for seeking age relaxation,
valid DL (motorcycle or car) etc. would be checked only of the candidate
who-successfully qualify all the events of PE&MT i.e. race, Long/high
jump and physical measurement. The candidate will also be required to
produce self-attested copies of all the original documents/certificates for
checking their eligibility at the time of PE&MT as per PE&MT sheet.
xiv) In case any candidate fails to produce the requisite documents during
PE&MT process, his/her candidature will be rejected. However, he/she
may be given a chance to submit the required, documents within 05
working days. After production of required documents, his/her candidature
will be re-considered on merit. However, the candidate must have a valid
Driving License issued on or before the actual date of PE&MT.”
e-Admit Card
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
2. Candidate must bring all Educational Certificates, Caste certificate,
Police ward certificate, Hill Area, Sports Certificates, NCC and
Departmental Certificate along with one set of photocopy of all
certificates, which is mandatory.
8. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, while controverting the
findings of the Tribunal, has made the following submissions:
8.1. It is contended that the requirement of furnishing a valid EWS
certificate, strictly in the prescribed format, issued on or before the
stipulated cut-off date and for the relevant financial year, constitutes a
binding eligibility condition, non-compliance of which necessarily
entails consideration of the candidature under the UR category.
However, the Tribunal erred by treating this as a mere technicality,
contrary to settled law prohibiting relaxation of notified criteria.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 5 of 17
8.2. Developing his submissions further, the Court‟s attention was
drawn to the documents on record, including the PE&MT sheet and the
Webtool sheet, to highlight that the reclassification of the candidature
of Respondent was not arbitrary, rather a direct consequence of his
failure to produce a compliant certificate issued in the relevant financial
year.
8.3. It is argued that the certificates issued on 31.05.2023 and
12.01.2024, forming part of the Respondent‟s representation, are
legally untenable. With respect to the Certificate dated 31.05.2023, it
has been argued that the same is dehors the prescribed Annexure-VII
format and bereft of essential asset particulars as mandated under
Clause 6.4 of the Recruitment Notice. Parallelly, with regard to the
Certificate dated 12.01.2024, it is contended that it being issued beyond
the stipulated cut-off date, is rendered ex facie inadmissible.
8.4. Learned counsel also argued that the Tribunal erred in equating
EWS certificates with caste certificates, overlooking the fundamental
distinction that while caste is an immutable, birth-based status, EWS
eligibility is a dynamic condition, determined with reference to the
financial year and subject to strict compliance with prescribed formal
and temporal requirements. In this backdrop, it is argued that Clause
6.4 of the Recruitment Notice rightly prohibits acceptance of
certificates issued after the cut-off date.
8.5. Lastly, it is contended that the reliance placed by the Tribunal on
1
Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, JEE , is misplaced, as the said decision
1
(2005) 9 SCC 779
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 6 of 17
pertains to rectification of minor defects in documents submitted within
time and does not sanction the post cut-off substitution of a non-
compliant reservation certificate.
9. Per contra , learned counsel for the Respondent has made the
following submissions:
9.1. It has been argued that at the stage of document verification, the
Respondent had duly produced all three EWS certificates dated
02.09.2019, 31.05.2023 and 13.01.2024. Further, it is contended that
the objection now sought to be raised with respect to the certificate
dated 31.05.2023 being not in the prescribed format is an afterthought,
having been raised for the first time before this Court, and therefore
cannot be permitted to defeat an otherwise legitimate claim.
9.2. Learned counsel contended that Clause 6.4 of Recruitment
Notice is vague, as it does not specify the financial year to which the
EWS certificate must relate. Attention of this Court was drawn to a
subsequent Recruitment Notice of 2025 to contend that the Petitioner
itself has since clarified this requirement, and therefore, the ambiguity
in the present notice must operate to the benefit of the Respondent.
ANALYSIS & REASONING:
10. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
placed on record.
11. At the outset, it may be noted that the controversy in the present
case lies within a narrow compass. The issue that falls for
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 7 of 17
determination is whether the Respondent, who had applied under the
EWS category, satisfied the mandatory eligibility condition of
possession and production of a valid EWS certificate, in the prescribed
format and pertaining to the relevant financial year, as on the
crucial/cut-off date, i.e., 30.09.2023.
12. The regime for reservation in favour of EWS candidates at the
Union level owes its genesis to the Office Memorandum (OM) dated
19.01.2019 and 31.01.2019 issued by the Department of Personnel and
Training (DoPT). These documents not only lay down the income and
asset criteria but also mandate that eligibility is to be determined with
reference to a prescribed financial year, to be evidenced by a valid
Income and Asset Certificate (I&AC) issued in the notified format by
the competent authority.
2
13. The Supreme Court in Divya v Union of India & Ors. , while
upholding the Civil Examination Rules, 2022, treated the requirements
prescribed under the OM dated 19.01.2019 and 31.01.2019, as
substantive eligibility conditions rather than mere procedural
formalities. The Court underscored that the possession of the requisite
I&AC, founded upon income and assets pertaining to the relevant
financial year, as mandated by the rules and OM, constitutes a
condition precedent for claiming EWS status in the concerned selection
process. The Court also emphasised that where the rules clearly
prescribe the date by which such certificate must not only be possessed
but also produced, any candidate who fails to submit a valid certificate,
determining EWS eligibility with reference to the prescribed period,
2
(2024) 1 SCC 448
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 8 of 17
before the cut-off date, cannot insist on being treated as an EWS
candidate, and the recruiting agency would be fully justified in denying
the benefit of reservation.
14. In a subsequent decision of Sakshi Arha v The Rajasthan High
3
Court & Ors , concerning reservations for OBC-NCL/MBC-NCL and
EWS candidates, the Supreme Court reiterated, in no uncertain terms,
the dynamic nature of categories predicated on economic status or the
non-creamy layer criterion. The Court categorically held that a
candidate applying under the OBC-NCL or EWS category must possess
the relevant and valid certificate on the last date for submission of
applications. It was expressly observed that OBC-NCL and EWS are
„highly dynamic and not static‟ categories, unlike caste per se , and
therefore strict adherence to the temporal stipulations contained in the
recruitment notification or the governing rules stands justified and
cannot be diluted on sympathetic considerations.
15. The aforesaid authorities, when read together, yield certain clear
propositions germane to EWS reservation in public employment. First ,
EWS eligibility is a dynamic, income-and-asset based status, to be
determined with reference to a particular financial year; whether a
candidate qualifies as “EWS” is to be assessed by reference to that
year‟s economic profile. Secondly , where the recruitment rules or
notification stipulate that a candidate must possess and/or submit a
valid EWS certificate by a particular crucial/cut-off date, such
stipulation forms an integral part of the eligibility criteria, and non-
compliance would, in the ordinary course, result in denial of the EWS
3
2025 INSC 463
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 9 of 17
benefit. Thirdly , the insistence that the certificate conform to the
prescribed format and relate to the relevant financial year is not a
pedantic or hyper-technical requirement; rather, it is rooted in the
foundational objective of ensuring that only those who are genuinely
eligible, in economic terms, receive the benefit of reservation.
16. In this backdrop, it becomes important to advert to the terms of
Recruitment Notice governing the candidature of the Respondent. A
conjoint reading of Clause 6.1, Clause 6.4, Clause 15.1 and Clause 16.8
of the Recruitment Notice, leaves a little room for ambiguity. Clause
6.4, in clear and categorical language, mandates that a candidate
applying under the EWS category must be in possession of a valid
EWS certificate as per Annexure-VII issued on or before the
crucial/cut-off date, that is, the closing date for receipt of online
applications. It further clarifies that any certificate issued after the said
date, even if relatable to the relevant financial period, shall not be
entertained and that such candidates shall be treated under the UR
category.
17. On the other hand, Clause 6.1, Clause 15.1 and Clause 16.8,
when read together, underscore the further requirement that candidates
who qualify the PE&MT must produce the requisite certificates,
including the EWS certificate, at the time of document verification.
Thus, the scheme of the notice contemplates a two-fold requirement:
timely possession in terms of the crucial date and timely production at
the stage of verification.
18. The language employed in the Recruitment Notice is peremptory
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 10 of 17
and admits of no discretion in its application. The conditions
highlighted therein, are not mere matters of procedure, rather they go to
the root of eligibility of a candidate. It is well settled that the terms and
conditions of a recruitment notification, having the force of law in the
context of the selection process, are binding on all stakeholders and
must be strictly complied with. Any deviation or relaxation, dehors the
terms of the notice, would not only amount to rewriting the rules of the
game midstream but would also offend the equality mandate enshrined
in Article 14 of the Constitution of India by injecting arbitrariness into
a process that must, by its very nature, be fair, transparent and uniform.
19. At this stage, it is apposite to advert to the OM dated 31.01.2019.
Clause 4.1 of the said OM, while prescribing the criteria of income and
assets for identification of EWS, also clarifies the relevant financial
year to be taken into consideration, namely, the financial year
immediately preceding the year of application. The said OM holds
significant importance, in as much as it removes any ambiguity in the
Recruitment Notice, with respect to the financial year applicable for
determining the eligibility of the candidates under the EWS category.
The relevant clause is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:
“4. Criteria Of Income & Assets:
4.1 Persons who are not covered under the scheme of reservation for
SCs, STs and OBCs and whose family has gross annual income below Rs.
8.00 lakh (Rupees eight lakh only) are to be identified as EWSs for benefit
of reservation. Income shall also include income from all sources i.e.
salary, agriculture, business, profession, etc. for the financial year prior
to the year of application.”
(Emphasis supplied)
20. In the present case, although it has been argued by the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 11 of 17
Respondent that, at the time of document verification, he produced the
EWS certificate pertaining to the year 2023, however, the record tells a
different story. The relevant extract from the PE&MT form is
reproduced hereunder:
DOCUMENT VERIFICATION WITH ORIGINAL CERTIFICATES
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
SC/ST/OBC/EWS/HILL
Area certificate (EWS
certificate issued on or
before the closing date of
receipt of online
application i.e.
30.09.2023
Yes EWS
issued on
dt 2-9-
2019
(iv)Ex-
Servicemen
(Others)
A perusal of PE&MT form reveals only the production of an EWS
certificate dated 02.09.2019, which although issued prior to the cut-off
date, clearly did not pertain to the relevant financial year. As regards
the certificate dated 31.05.2023, mere possession of a document would
not suffice unless the same satisfied the substantive requirement of
being in the required format at the time of document verification as
prescribed under the Recruitment Notice.
21. In this regard, it is pertinent to highlight that the Respondent has
not challenged the validity of PE&MT form, nor has any plausible
explanation been furnished by him as to why only the EWS certificate
dated 02.09.2019 was reflected in the PE&MT form at the time of
document verification. Similarly, no cogent justification has been
advanced as to why reliance was placed on a certificate which, e x facie ,
did not relate to the financial year immediately before the last date of
submission of application, i.e. 2022-23.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 12 of 17
22. Additionally, even otherwise, reliance placed by the Respondent
upon the certificate dated 31.05.2023, to contend that the same was
submitted prior to 30.09.2023, which was the last date to submit the
documents, is also subject to scrutiny. The said document was not
accepted by the Department being not in the format prescribed. The
Recruitment Notice specifically prescribed the format of the EWS
certificate to be produced in order to avail the benefit of EWS category.
The format is reproduced as under:
23. We have also perused the certificate dated 31.05.2023, which the
Petitioner claimed to have allegedly produced before the Department.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 13 of 17
Even if the case of the Respondent is taken at the highest that the said
certificate was in fact submitted within the stipulated time limit, the
same concededly was not as per the format. The said certificated dated
31.05.2023 is reproduced as under:
24. Thus, upon a perusal of the aforesaid documents, it remains
undisputed that no valid certificate has been submitted by the
Respondent prior to the cut-off date. In such circumstances, once it is
established that no valid certificate was produced and that the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 14 of 17
Respondent was not in possession of the requisite certificate on the
closing date of application i.e., 30.09.2023, in the considered opinion of
this Court, the Tribunal fell in error in allowing the O.A. by considering
the EWS certificate dated 31.05.2023, to be in conformity with the
advertisement and by considering alleged submission of the same to be
valid.
25. Accordingly, once the Recruitment Notice, as well as the e-admit
card, explicitly mandated the production of a valid EWS certificate
issued as per Annexure-VII and pertaining to the financial year 2022-
23, the Respondent was under an obligation to strictly adhere to the said
requirement. However, in deviation thereof, the Respondent chose to
rely upon an EWS certificate of the year 2019, which, by its very
nature, stood in plain and irreconcilable conflict with the prescribed
conditions. Similarly, the reliance placed on EWS certificate dated
31.05.2023 is wholly untenable, inasmuch as the same is not in
consonance with the prescribed format under Annexure-VII of the
Recruitment Notice.
26. The submission advanced on behalf of the Respondent that
Clause 6.4 is vague, on the ground that it does not expressly spell out
the relevant financial year, is equally devoid of merit. The requirement
that the certificate must be valid for the relevant financial year is
implicit in the very nature of EWS certification, which is inherently
time-sensitive and contingent upon the economic status of the candidate
for a particular financial year. The absence of an explicit mention does
not render the clause ambiguous so as to warrant an interpretation in
favour of the candidate, particularly when the scheme of the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 15 of 17
Recruitment Notice, read as a whole, clearly highlights a strict temporal
compliance.
27. Equally untenable is the reliance placed upon a subsequent
Recruitment Notice of the year 2025, to contend that the Recruitment
Notice of 2023 was ambiguous. It is well settled that a subsequent
clarification, refinement or modification in a later recruitment exercise
cannot be employed to retrospectively alter or dilute the nature, content
or rigour of the terms governing an earlier selection process, unless the
later notification itself expressly provides for such retrospective
application, which is conspicuously absent in the present case.
28. The distinction sought to be drawn between caste certificates and
EWS certificates, as emphasised by the Petitioner is, in the considered
view of this Court, well-founded. Caste is an immutable characteristic,
determined by birth and ordinarily unaffected by the vicissitudes of
time. EWS status, however, is fluid, contingent and susceptible to
change with the ebb and flow of a candidate‟s financial circumstances.
It is precisely for this reason that the insistence on a certificate
pertaining to the relevant financial year, issued within the stipulated
timeframe, assumes particular and critical importance. In our opinion,
the Tribunal, erred in overlooking this fundamental conceptual
distinction.
CONCLUSION:
29. In light of the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the
considered view that the Tribunal fell into an error in allowing the
Original Application by treating the requirement of submission of a
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 16 of 17
valid EWS certificate as a mere technicality.
30. The Respondent, having failed to satisfy the mandatory
eligibility conditions as to possession and production of a valid EWS
certificate for the relevant financial year by the crucial/cut-off date, was
rightly disentitled to the benefit of the EWS category, and his
candidature could only be reckoned in the unreserved pool. The
contrary view taken by the Tribunal cannot, therefore, be sustained in
law.
31. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed in the aforesaid
terms. The Impugned Order dated 04.04.2025 is hereby set aside.
32. The present Petition stands disposed of. The pending applications
shall stand closed.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J.
MAY 11, 2026
s.godara/hr
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI
NARAYAN
Signing Date:11.05.2026
16:16:48
W.P.(C) 9332/2025 Page 17 of 17