Ankit Didal vs UNION OF INDIA

1
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026

Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi

O.A. No. 2533/2026
M.A. No. 3261/2026

nd
This the 22 day of October, 2026

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon’ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)

Ankit Didal, (Appointment), Group'C', Aged About 31 years,
S/o Sh. Bhagwan Singh Didal, R/o 821, Gokul Nagar, Yojana
Kalwar Road, Distt. Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302012.
...Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. MK Bhardwaj)

Versus

1.Union of India through Secretary,
DOP&T, 31042, Kartavya Bhavan-03, New Delhi-110001

2. Staff Selection Commission through its Chairman, Block No.
12, CGO (Complex), Lodhi Road, New Delhi

3. The Regional Director, Staff Selection Commission, Block No.
12, CGO (Complex), Lodhi Road, New Delhi

4. Central Hindi Directorate, through its Director, Department of
Higher Education, Ministry of Education, West Block - VII, R. K.
Puram, New Delhi-110066
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Dr. Sudarshan Kumar and Mr. Vishal Thapar)
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA

2
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026

O R D E R (ORAL)

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

1. In the instant O.A., the applicant is seeking the following
reliefs:
"i) To quash and set aside the impugned Annexure A-1 and
direct the respondents to consider the applicant's claim for
appointment to the post of Evaluator (Correspondence
Courses) in Central Hindi Directorate, Department of Higher
Education, Ministry of Education on the basis of his merit
with all consequential benefits.
ii) To declare the action of respondents tn cancelling the
candidature of applicant for appointment to the post of
Evaluator (Correspondence Courses) in Central Hindi
Directorate, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of
Education as illegal and accordingly issue appropriate
directions to the respondents to treat the applicant's
candidature as valid and appoint him to the post of
Evaluator (Correspondence Courses) in Central Hindi
Directorate, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of
Education with all consequential benefits including arrears
of pay.
iii) To direct the respondents to include the name of
applicant in the list of selected candidates (Annexure A-1A)
and appoint him to the post of Evaluator (Correspondence
Courses) in Central Hindi Directorate, Department of Higher
Education, Ministry of Education.
iv) To declare the action of respondents in not accepting the
MA marksheet as submitted on 30.72.2025 merely
mentioning of 'Medium' as English in the marksheet as
illegal and declare that the applicant submitted all the
requisite documents as on 30.12.2025 and appoint him to the
post of Evaluator (Correspondence Courses) tn Central
Hindi Directorate, Department of Higher Education,
Ministry of Education.
v) To allow the OA with cost.
vi) Any other orders may also be passed as this Hon'ble
Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the existing facts and
circumstances of the case."
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA

3
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026

2. Learned counsel for the applicant also presses for urgent
interim relief in terms of para 9 of the O.A., which reads
as under:
"Pending final adjudication of the OA, it is humbly prayed
that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the
respondents to keep 01 post of Evaluator (Correspondence
Courses) in Central Hindi Directorate, Department of Higher
Education, Ministry of Education as vacant. In case/ the
interim relief as prayed is not granted, the applicant would
suffer irreparable loss."

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
present O.A. has been preferred challenging the arbitrary
action of the respondents in cancelling the applicant's
candidature on the ground that he had allegedly failed to
submit the corrected M.A. (Hindi) degree by the
stipulated date, i.e., 24.06.2026. It is contended that
there was, in fact, no defect in the applicant's M.A.
(Hindi) degree, which had already been duly submitted
on 30.12.2025. The only discrepancy was an inadvertent
error in the M.A. marksheet issued by the concerned
University, which required correction. According to the
learned counsel, as per the undertaking furnished by the
applicant, the corrected marksheet was only required to
be submitted before joining service.
4. Learned counsel further submits that the error was
confined only to the marksheet and not to the degree
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA

4
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026

itself, contrary to what has been recorded in the remarks
forming the basis of rejection of the applicant's
candidature. It is submitted that this position is evident
from the documents placed on record.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that
the concerned University has already corrected the
inadvertent error in the marksheet and the corrected
marksheet has been placed on record at page 218 of the
O.A. It is contended that despite the availability of the
corrected document, the respondents proceeded to pass
the impugned order without taking the same into
consideration.
6. Pleadings in the O.A. are complete. Therefore, with the
consent of learned counsels for the parties, the O.A. is
taken up for hearing.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents by referring to the
contentions made in the counter reply submits that
during the process of document verification it was
noticed that marklist of the Master’s degree in Hindi has
been done through English medium, hence, it was
doubted how could one possess M.A. in Hindi in English.
It is not contested by the respondents that the degree was
obtained by the applicant within the stipulated time,
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA

5
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026

however, there was an error as elaborated above. He
draws attention to page 217 of the O.A. where in the
promotion certificate it has been recorded that the
medium was Hindi.

8. He submits that the correction ought to have been made
prior to the cutoff date. Learned counsel for the
respondents goes on to argue that the applicant had given
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA

6
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026

an undertaking dated 30.12.2025 regarding the
submission of the rectified marksheet. It is seen that this
undertaking has been received by some official, however,
it has not been addressed to any authority.
9. It is imperative to note that the above argument cannot
hold much water as either the respondents should rely on
the undertaking or deny the receipt of the same.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that
despite the undertaking given by the applicant, he has
failed to submit it within the stipulated time.
11. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and
with their assistance we have also perused the pleadings
available on record.
12. We are of the considered that there is no doubt about the
fact that the applicant was having the degree M.A.(Hindi)
as per the prescribed and an error had crept in in the
marksheet which is apparent from the records. It is also
noticed that corrective steps have been taken by the
applicant to produce the correct marksheet (reproduced
below).
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA

7
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026


13. After careful consideration of the marksheet, it is seen
that the result was declared on 03.12.2021, which is
much before the cutoff date, however, the corrected
marksheet was issued on 01.01.2026. The respondents
could have verified the above for determining the claim of
the applicant from the competent authority. As a matter
of fact, the degree of the applicant is not disputed (Page
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA

8
Item No. 34 (C-4)

O.A. No. 2533/2026

216 of the O.A.). The rejection order is based on the
premise that there is an error in the degree. We have seen
that there is no error apparent in the degree of the
applicant as annexed with the O.A. The error in the
marksheet cannot be a sole ground to reject the claim of
the applicant, once the same has been rectified.
14. In view of the above, the O.A. is allowed with the
following directions:-
i. The impugned order annexed as Annexure A1 is
quashed and set aside.
ii. The respondents are directed to accept the
candidature of the applicant and issue him an offer
of appointment on his meeting all the other
requirements within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
iii. The applicant shall be entitled to all consequential
benefits on notional basis.
15. Pending M.A. stands disposed of accordingly.
16. There shall be no order as to costs.


(Anand S. Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)

/dd /
2026.10.30
16:35:22
+05'30'
DEEKSHA
DHINGRA