Date of decision: August 17, 2004.


Kusum Yadav & Ors. Petitioner                   ...              Petitioner

Through Mr.Raman Duggal,Advocate




Delhi Subordinate Services

Selection Board & Ors.                               ...              Respondents.


Ms.Zubeda Begum,Advocate for respondent Nos.1-2.

Mr.Rakesh Kr.Garg,Advocate for respondent No.3.


Manmohan Sarin, J(ORAL).


1.              Rule.

With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal.


2.              Petitioners are aggrieved by the non-issuance of admit card for the examination for the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) under respondent No.2/Govt of NCT of Delhi and respondent No.3/MCD. Petitioners' case is that they had duly sent by post the completed forms at the Post Box address given. As the application had to be sent to a address of Post Box Number, there was no question of petitioners getting acknowledgment of the same. However, in support of their case that the application had been duly sent, petitioners have urged that they had purchased postal orders well before the last date and the photocopies of the said postal orders have been filed with the writ petition to establish their bona fides. I find merit in this submission. The factum of purchase of postal orders coupled with the statement on affidavit raises a presumption in their favour.


3.              Vide order dated 10.10.2002, respondents were directed to issue admit card and permit the petitioners to take the examination. The result of the examination had been announced. However, petitioners' result had not been announced, since the matter was pending and they had been issued admit cards without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and final directions by the Court. Ms.Zubeda Begum has shown in Court a compilation of the result as well as record relating to fixation of cut off marks. The same has been perused. It is seen that petitioner Nos.1,3 and 4 have duly cleared the written examination and have qualified and become eligible for appointment having secured more than the cut off marks.


4.              Petitioner No.2 has rather been unfortunate. She secured the cut off marks. However, a person elder to her in age had also secured the cut off marks and as per the criteria adopted of preferring the senior in age, he has been declared qualified.


5..             Mr.Raman Duggal submits that in case there is a vacancy, petitioner should be considered for appointment. Ms.Catherine Methai, Superintendent, Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, submits that in case vacancy arises, which brings the petitioner within the zone of consideration, he would be considered as per her seniority. Nothing further survives in the writ petition.


6.              Writ petition stands disposed of.


August 17, 2004                                                          Manmohan Sarin,J.