The Delhi High Court recently rejected a writ petition challenging a decision by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The petitioner sought to claim seniority from 2007 despite being appointed as a Sub Inspector in 2009, arguing that he should have been appointed in 2007.
A division bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Girish Kathpalia ruled that since the petitioner was already appointed in 2009, he had no legal right to demand an appointment for the 2007 recruitment cycle. The petitioner had applied for a Sub Inspector position under the Unreserved (UR) category in 2007 but missed the cut-off score by one point. Despite his arguments that not all vacancies were filled and some candidates with lower scores were appointed, the Tribunal had previously dismissed his claim.
The High Court, referencing earlier rulings, including Shankarsan Dash vs. Union of India and Vallampati Sathish Babu vs. State of A.P., held that merely participating in a recruitment process does not guarantee an appointment. Furthermore, there was no waiting list for the 2007 recruitment, so the petitioner could not claim a position from that cycle. The court also rejected his request for seniority from 2007, noting that his appointment in 2009 was valid and his seniority should only date from that year. Consequently, the court upheld the CAT's rulings and dismissed the petition.
