CAT - ['Delhi']
Administrative and Public LawEmployment and Labour Law

Category-change representations require reasoned consideration, but reclassification is not guaranteed.

Parul Bansal vs UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (UPSC)

CAT - ['Delhi']JUDGMENT: October 01, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Category-change representations require reasoned consideration, but reclassification is not guaranteed.. Parul Bansal vs UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (UPSC). CAT - ['Delhi']. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

UPSC advertised vacancies for Assistant Public Prosecutor in the Directorate of Prosecution, Government of NCT of Delhi, including EWS vacancies.

Source reference: no citation

The applicant applied in the Unreserved category.

Source reference: no citation

She stated that she later obtained an EWS certificate before the application deadline of 2 October 2026, but could not edit or refile her application to claim EWS status.

Source reference: p. 2–4

She had submitted a representation to UPSC dated 30 September 2026 and sought, among other reliefs, consideration of her candidature in the EWS category.

Source reference: p. 2–4

The Tribunal disposed of the original application by directing UPSC to consider and decide that representation.

Source reference: p. 5
02

Issues

1. Whether UPSC should be directed to consider and decide the applicant’s representation seeking a change of category from Unreserved to EWS

Source reference: p. 5

2. Whether the Tribunal should itself direct that the applicant be permitted to submit an online or offline application for the category change

Source reference: p. 5
03

Law Applied

The application was brought under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which provides for an application to the Tribunal concerning a service matter.

Source reference: p. 4

The order cites no statutory provision, recruitment rule, precedent, or substantive legal test governing a change of category in the selection process.

Source reference: p. 5

It directs UPSC to decide the applicant’s representation in accordance with law, by a reasoned and speaking order.

Source reference: p. 5
04

Reasoning

The Tribunal did not determine whether the applicant was entitled to EWS consideration or whether UPSC’s application system unlawfully prevented a category change.

Source reference: p. 5

Instead, given the representation dated 30 September 2026 and the grievance raised, it directed UPSC to consider the matter holistically and decide the representation in accordance with law.

Source reference: p. 5

It left open the possibility of permitting an online or offline category-change application if UPSC deemed that appropriate, noting that no separate window had been prescribed for that purpose.

Source reference: p. 5
05

Holding

The Tribunal disposed of the original application and directed UPSC to consider and decide the applicant’s representation dated 30 September 2026 within one month of receiving a certified copy of the order, through a reasoned and speaking order.

UPSC was directed to consider the grievance holistically and, if deemed appropriate, permit an online or offline application for change of category.

Source reference: p. 5

The Tribunal did not itself grant EWS status or direct that the applicant be considered in that category.

Source reference: p. 5

Pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of; there was no order as to costs.

Source reference: p. 5
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Administrative Tribunals Act, 19851

CAT - ['Delhi']

Original Court PDF

Parul BansalvsUNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (UPSC)

CAT - ['Delhi'] · October 01, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment