Biometric Mismatch Cannot Indefinitely Delay Recruitment Result; Provisional Appointment Required Pending Delayed FSL Report

The applicants participated in the recruitment process for the post of Constable (Executive) Male Female in the Delhi Police Examination – 2023

Although the applicants successfully cleared the Computer Based Examination and physical tests, their candidatures were withheld due to biometric/fingerprint mismatches observed during verification

A committee constituted by the Commissioner of Police referred the cases to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), Rohini, for expert opinion to rule out impersonation and fraud

As of the hearing date, FSL reports for several applicants remained outstanding, leaving their results in a "withheld" status indefinitely

1. Whether the respondents are justified in withholding the recruitment results of successful candidates indefinitely due to the non-receipt of FSL reports regarding biometric mismatches

2. Whether a provisional appointment can be granted to candidates whose results are pending forensic verification to prevent prejudice caused by administrative delays

The recruitment is governed by Rule 9 and Rule 14(c) of the Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) Rules, 1980, and Standing Order No. HRD-4/2022

The Tribunal relied on the legal principle established by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Samir Sudhakar Jivtode v. Union of India, which held that when a biometric mismatch is not attributable to the candidate and they have successfully cleared all examinations, the respondents are not justified in withholding results for an extended period

The Tribunal observed that the Selection Process commenced in late 2023, and the matter could not be kept pending indefinitely solely due to the FSL's delay, as it impacts the candidates' legitimate expectations

While acknowledging the seriousness of potential impersonation, the Tribunal balanced this against the applicants' interests by directing the respondents to expedite coordination with FSL

By adopting the reasoning in Samir Sudhakar Jivtode, the Tribunal concluded that administrative or technical delays in verification should not stall the entire recruitment status of a candidate who has otherwise qualified on merit

Consequently, the Tribunal devised a mechanism where a "time-bound" finalization is mandatory, failing which a "provisional" status must be granted to prevent further prejudice

Specifically, it held: (1) for candidates whose FSL reports are received, results must be revised within two months and appointments issued if eligible; (2) for cases where reports remain delayed beyond this period, the respondents must issue a provisional offer of appointment. Such provisional appointment does not confer a vested right, is subject to the final FSL outcome, and may be revoked with a recovery of benefits if the report is ultimately adverse