DHARNISH DUTT TIWARI vs M/o Communications on 16 October 2026

O R D E R

By Mallika Arya, AM

Through this Original Application, the applicant is seeking quashment of the order dated 04.03.2015 (Annexure A/1) whereby recruitment notification for the post of GDS BPM has been cancelled. He is seeking directions to the respondents to allow him to work as Shakha Dakpal Hantla under Accuonts Office Vijayraghogarh.

2. Briefly stating, the facts of the case are that the respondents published a notification dated 05.12.2013 for selection and appointment to the post of Gramin Dak Sevak - Shakha Dakpal (GDS BPM) for General (OC) Category for Hantla Post Office, Account Office - Vijayraghogarh SO. The applicant having fulfilled the eligibility criteria (Class 10th pass), filled the application form. Vide communication dated 24.09.2014 (Annexure A/2), the respondent No. 4 informed the applicant that after appreciation of marks and documents, his name is proposed for appointment as Shakha Dakpal, Hantla. In pursuance of the same, the applicant swore a declaration dated 08.10.2014 (Annexure A/3) that he is willing to execute a security bond of Rs. 25,000/-. He was directed to appear in the office of Respondent No. 4 along with requisite documents and a consent letter within 7 days. Respondent No. 4 also sent a letter to the District Magistrate, Umaria on 28.10.2014 (Annexure A/4) for furnishing attestation form for verification of character and antecedents of

VISHAL KUSHWAH

candidate for the post of GDS BPM. The applicant filled the attestation form along with declaration on oath and a Medical Certificate complete in all respects (Annexure A-5) and he was waiting for final appointment order. Thereafter, all of a sudden, he received impugned order dated 04.03.2015 (Annexure A/1) cancelling the notification 05.12.2013 for the post of GDS BPM Hantla with immediate effect. The applicant submits that the order dated 04.03.2015 (Annexure A/1) is illegal and is liable to be set aside.

3. The respondents have filed their reply wherein it has been submitted that in pursuance of Director General, Department of Posts, New Delhi O.M. dated 17.02.2011 circulated vide CPMG, M.P. Circle, Bhopal letter dated 22.02.2011, notifications were issued for 101 vacant posts of BPMs in Jabalpur Postal Division with the following breakup: Sl. No. Category Vacancies

1. UR

2. OBC NIL

3. SC

4. ST

Notification for Hantla BO (Account Office Vijayraghogarh SO) was issued on 05.12.2013 for OC category. In pursuance to the selection process, the applicant got selected and he was given an offer

VISHAL KUSHWAH

letter/proposal for appointment (Annexure R/1) and not an appointment order. While the process of engagement was underway, some discrepancies were noticed in the gradation list and roster register of GDS BPMs of Jabalpur Division. On the date of notification i.e. 05.12.2013, there were 29 excess representation under OC category. No notification should have been issued for OC category as 29 OC GDS BPMs were already in excess of their required representation. However, notification was erroneously issued on 05.12.2013 for 50 GDS BPMs under OC category. When this fact came to notice, the SSPOs, Jabalpur was directed by the Postmaster General, Indore Region to update the existing gradation list and roster register and to reconcile the vacancies so as to rectify the mistakes committed at the level of SSPOs, Jabalpur in maintenance of roster, otherwise it would have been injustice for OBC/SC/ST categories and would have been in violation of Postal Directorate instructions No. 19-11/97-ED & TRG dated 27.11.1997 (Annexure R/2). Therefore, the excess notification issued for OC category was cancelled vide memo dated 04.03.2015 (Annexure R/3) by the Postmaster General. The applicant was neither issued any appointment letter nor was he given joining to the post. Mere proposal for his appointment does not bestow any vested right in his favour.

VISHAL KUSHWAH

4. We have considered the matter, heard the counsels and perused the pleadings and documents annexed with the Original Application.

5. We take note of the fact that when the process of engagement of GDS BPM in Jabalpur Postal Division was going on, there were some discrepancies in the gradation list and roster register of GDS BPMs of Jabalpur Division. On audit, it was found that on date of notification i.e. 04.12.2013, 29 excess posts were notified under OC category, violating 50% ceiling prescribed in Postal Directorate instructions No. 19-11/97- ED & TRG dated 27.11.1997 Para 4(vi) (Annexure R/2). Notification was issued erroneously for 50 GDS BPMs under OC category. When this fact came to the notice, the SSPOs, Jabalpur was directed by the Postmaster General, Indore Region to update the existing gradation list and roster register and to reconcile the vacancies in line with the Postal Directorate instructions No. 19-11/97-ED & TRG dated 27.11.1997 (Annexure R/2). Therefore, to protect reservation of SC/ST, PMG Indore ordered to recast roster and cancel excess OC notification vide Memo dated 04.03.2015 (Annexure R/3). Thus, the advertisement by which the applicant was selected, got cancelled. After correction, Badkheda BO fell at ST roster point. Hence, fresh notification dated 24.03.2015 was issued for ST.

VISHAL KUSHWAH

6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shankarsan Dash Vs Union of India, (1991) 3 SCC 47 and State of Haryana Vs Subhash Chander Marwaha, (1974) 1 SCC 220 held that mere participation in selection process and mere inclusion of name in select list, the candidates do not have indefeasible right to get appointment. The decision not to fill up vacancies has to be taken in good faith for appropriate reasons.

7. The applicant cannot claim appointment on the basis of notification which has been cancelled due to administrative error and to protect the legitimate rights of reserved categories. It is a fact on record that the applicant was never appointed on regular basis. The process of appointment of the selected candidates was underway. He was given only provisional offer vide letter dated 24.09.2014 (Annexure A/2). Since the applicant was never given appointment as GDS, BPM, therefore, before issuing the impugned order 04.03.2015, there was no requirement to issue any show cause notice to the applicant under GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011.

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Assam & Ors. vs Arabinda Rabha & Ors, 2025 INSC 334 has held as follows: “The State has the administrative discretion to scrap a recruitment process if systemic, widespread irregularities taint the selection process. The decision to cancel the selection process taken in a bonafide manner cannot be said to be arbitrary. Inclusion in a

VISHAL KUSHWAH

select list or empanelment does not confer an indefeasible or vested legal right to public appointment.”

9. Hence we find that there is no fault in the action of the respondents in terminating the services of the applicant on account of discrepancies in the selection process, as per rules.

10. In view of the above, there is no merit in the Original Application. The same is dismissed. No costs.

(Mallika Arya) (Rajinder Singh Dogra) Administrative Member Judicial Member VK/-

VISHAL KUSHWAH