Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Pankaj Singh vs Ut Of J & K & Ors on 29 August, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Kumar
Bench: Sanjeev Kumar
Sr. No. 44
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP (C) No. 2373/2025
Pankaj Singh .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Sachin Dogra, Advocate
Mr. Rahul Parihar, Advocate
v/s
UT of J & K & Ors. .....Respondent(s)
Through :-
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER (ORAL)
29.08.2025
Sanjeev Kumar J
1. Impugned in this petition, filed by the petitioner under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, is an order and judgment dated
22.07.2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu
("the Tribunal") in OA No. 680/2025 titled "Pankaj Singh vs. UT of
J & K and Ors", whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the OA being
devoid of any merit.
2. Briefly stated, the short grievance that was projected by the
petitioner in the OA before the Tribunal was that the respondent
had responded to the advertisement notification no. 02 of 2021
dated 26.03.2021 by submitting his application for the post of
Plumber in the Health and Medical Education Department. After
completion of the selection process, it came to the notice of the
petitioner that he was a candidate belonging to RBA category, but
had not been reflected in the said list. On enquiry, the petitioner
found that in the application form which he had submitted, he had
inadvertently tick-marked the Open Category instead of RBA.
3. The petitioner in unequivocal terms conceded before the Tribunal
and this is writ large in the pleadings of the OA that claiming the
benefit of Open Category instead of RBA in the application form
uploaded was on account of a mistake and not because of failure in
the system or any technical glitch.
4. The petition was considered by the Tribunal and having found that
the petitioner had himself applied under open merit category and,
therefore, could not have been permitted to change his category at a
later stage, i.e., after the publication of the select list, the Tribunal
has dismissed the OA.
5. Before us, Mr. Sachin Dogra, learned counsel for the petitioner
placing reliance on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of "Vashist Narayan Kumar. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors.
2024 INSC" and a couple of judgments by different High Courts,
i.e., "Manjana vs. State of HP and Ors." by the Himachal Pradesh
High Court, "Ms. Charu Kain vs. High Court of Delhi" by the
Delhi High Court and "Dr. Lakshmi P. Gowda vs. Nation
National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences and Anr."
by the Karnataka High Court, would argue that the mistake came to
be committed by the petitioner because of the defect in the system
provided for uploading of the application form and therefore, the
petitioner should not be penalized.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material on record, we are of the considered opinion that the stand
of the petitioner that mistake was committed by him due to
technical glitch is only an afterthought. Had the petitioner faced any
difficulty during filling up and uploading of the form, he would
have immediately approached the Service Selection Board with a
representation or complaint. This has not happened. He allowed the
process of selection to be completed. It is only when he could not
find his name in the select list, he came up with the representation
asking for the correction of the error in the application form so as to
consider him under RBA category instead of open category for
which he himself had tick-marked in his application form.
7. The Tribunal has rightly found that the so called error was not
attributable to a technical glitch, but was actually the choice made
by the petitioner. The judgments referred to by the learned counsel
for the petitioner are distinguishable on fact and pertain to cases
where a technical glitch had contributed to errors. However, such, is
not a case of the petitioner.
8. For the foregoing reasons, we find no merit in this petition and the
same is, accordingly, dismissed. Notwithstanding the dismissal of
this petition, the right of the petitioner to be considered under open
merit category shall remain unprejudiced.
(Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar)
Judge Judge
JAMMU
29.08.2025
Manik
Whether this order is speaking: yes/no
Whether this order is reportable: yes/no
