Mohammed Salik v. Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS.

$~11 & 20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 19.12.2025 (11)+ W.P.(C) 18306/2025 (20)+ W.P.(C) 18274/2025 SHEEBA .....Petitioner MOHAMMED SALIK .....Petitioner Through:

Mr.Anuj Aggarwal, Mr.Nikhil Pawar and Ms.Kritika Matta, Advs.

versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through:

Mrs.Avnish Ahlawat, SC for GNCTD (Services) with Mr.Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms.Aliza Alam and Mr.Mohnish Sehrawat, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 75847/2025 (Exemption) in W.P.(C) 18306/2025 CM APPL. 75598/2025 (Exemption) in W.P.(C) 18274/2025 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 18306/2025 & CM APPL. 75846/2025 W.P.(C) 18274/2025 & CM APPL. 75597/2025 2.

These petitions have been filed, challenging the Order dated 01.07.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the, 'Tribunal') in O.A. No. 2682/2019 (in W.P.(C) 18306/2025) and in O.A. No. 867/2019 (in W.P.(C) 18274/2025), by which the learned Tribunal has W.P.(C) 18306/2025 & W.P.(C) 18274/2025 By:REYMON VASHIST 17:40:25

dismissed the above said O.A.(s) filed by the petitioners herein. 3.

The petitioners had appeared in the selection process for various posts advertised by the respondent no.2, Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB). In the written examination, their paper was not marked as they had committed a mistake while bubbling their roll numbers on the OMR sheet.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this was a minor mistake which should not entail the severe consequence of these petitioners being denied a fair opportunity of participating in the selection process. He submits that there are other means by which the identity of the candidate giving the examination can be easily made out, including from the specific OMR question booklet number and also the barcode. He further submits that even the invigilator at the Centre did not point out the discrepancy in the bubbling of the roll numbers by the petitioners.

5.

We have examined the above submissions in a judgment dated 21.08.2025 of this Court in Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr. v. Niharika Puhan, 2025: DHC:7093-DB. 6.

For the reasons stated therein, we find no merit in the present petitions. The same are, accordingly, dismissed. 7.

The pending applications stand disposed of.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J MADHU JAIN, J DECEMBER 19, 2025/sg/pb W.P.(C) 18306/2025 & W.P.(C) 18274/2025 By:REYMON VASHIST 17:40:25