COVID-19-delayed EWS certificates cannot invalidate appointments where issuance was impeded by lockdown conditions.

The Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) advertised vacancies for the post of TGT (Social Science) (Female), Post Code 40/21, with 24 June 2021 as the closing date.

The applicants participated in the selection process and were provisionally nominated under the EWS category pursuant to Result Notice No. 169 dated 24 August 2022. They were appointed by the Directorate of Education and joined service on 24 December 2022.

Subsequently, by orders dated 24 May 2024, their services were terminated under Rule 5(1) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.

The respondents stated in their pleadings that the EWS certificates were invalid because they were issued after the prescribed cut-off date; in the case of the lead applicant, the certificate was issued on 16 February 2022, whereas the relevant cut-off date was 4 July 2021.

The applicants challenged the termination orders, principally contending that the orders were non-speaking and that the issue was covered by the Tribunal’s decision in Dimple Ahuja v. Chief Secretary, GNCTD & Ors.

Whether the applicants’ services could be terminated under Rule 5(1) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on the ground that their EWS certificates were issued after the prescribed cut-off date.

Whether the termination orders dated 24 May 2024 were sustainable when the applicants’ delayed issuance of EWS certificates was attributable to the prevailing COVID-19 restrictions and the issue was covered by binding or persuasive precedent.

The Tribunal considered Rule 5(1) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, under which the services of a temporary civil servant may be terminated in accordance with the prescribed conditions; however, the exercise of that power remained subject to applicable legal principles and judicial review.

The Tribunal relied upon its earlier decision in Dimple Ahuja v. Chief Secretary, Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors. , O.A. No. 2404/2024, which accepted that COVID-19-related administrative restrictions could explain the delayed issuance of EWS certificates and directed consideration of such certificates.

It further relied upon the Delhi High Court’s decision in Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors. v. Rishikesh Sharma & Ors. , W.P. (C) No. 2814/2024, and the Supreme Court’s dismissal of SLP (C) No. 13026/2025, thereby treating the legal position concerning delayed EWS certificates as settled.

The Tribunal also referred to the Supreme Court’s COVID-19 limitation orders, which excluded periods affected by the pandemic and lockdown from computation of limitation.

The Tribunal found that the two OAs involved identical facts and therefore adjudicated them by a common order, taking O.A. No. 2454/2024 as the lead matter.

Although the respondents relied on the applicants’ certificates being issued after the cut-off date and contended that the appointing authority could terminate temporary employees without assigning reasons, the Tribunal applied the reasoning in Dimple Ahuja .

That decision recognised that, during the COVID-19 lockdown, SDM and revenue offices were not functioning normally and that applicants could consequently receive EWS certificates after the prescribed date.

Since the same legal issue had already been examined by the Tribunal and the relevant view had been upheld through the dismissal of the challenge in the Rishikesh Sharma matter, the Tribunal held that the applicants’ cases were governed by that precedent.

The termination orders were therefore found unsustainable.

It directed the respondents to grant the applicants all consequential benefits in accordance with the applicable rules and law, and to comply with the directions expeditiously, preferably within three weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

No order as to costs was made.