Premature Challenges to Recruitment Processes are Liable for Dismissal with Liberty to Refile Case-Specific Grievances

The applicants (14 individuals) filed an Original Application (OA) before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) against the Staff Selection Commission (SSC), the Ministry of Personnel, and the Delhi Police.

During the proceedings, the OA was apparently dismissed or struck off, leading the applicants to file M.A. No. 759/2026 seeking its restoration.

On April 13, 2026, the Tribunal heard both the restoration application and the main matter. Both parties conceded that the subject matter of this OA was identical to a previously decided batch of cases.

1. Whether the Original Application should be restored to its original position.

2. Whether the reliefs sought by the applicants are maintainable at this stage in light of the Tribunal’s precedent in OA No. 635/2022.

The Tribunal applied the principle of res judicata or judicial consistency by following its own recent precedent established in OA No. 635/2022 (decided on 08.01.2026).

That ruling established that applications filed before a specific stage of administrative finality are "premature" and do not warrant judicial intervention at that juncture.

The court also applied procedural rules regarding the restoration of dismissed matters via Miscellaneous Applications (MA).

The Tribunal first addressed the procedural delay/dismissal by allowing M.A. No. 759/2026, thereby restoring the OA to the file.

Upon considering the merits, the Tribunal noted the consensus between the counsel for the applicants and the respondents that the legal issue was "squarely covered" by the decision in OA No. 635/2022.

In that benchmark case, the Coordinate Bench had determined that such claims were premature.

Consequently, the Tribunal found no reason to deviate from the established finding that no relief could be granted at this stage as the cause of action had not fully ripened.

The Tribunal dismissed OA No. 1720/2023 on the grounds that it was premature, consistent with the holding in OA No. 635/2022.

The applicants were granted liberty to raise their respective grievances in accordance with the law on a case-by-case basis should a future need arise. No costs were imposed.