Case Note & Summary
The petitioner participated in a recruitment process conducted by the Police Department, Government of Puducherry, for the post of Police Constable pursuant to a Recruitment Notification of the year 2018. She cleared the written examination and was called for Physical Standard Test (PST) and Physical Efficiency Test (PET), which were held between 19.01.2022 and 11.02.2022. The petitioner took the test on 08.02.2022, qualified in PST and the 200-metre race, but was disqualified in the Long Jump event. A rejection slip was issued under acknowledgment, and CCTV cameras were used for transparency. Aggrieved by the disqualification, the petitioner filed Original Application No.93 of 2022 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench. The Tribunal passed an interim order permitting her to participate again in PST/PET, despite her earlier failure in long jump. In her second attempt, she cleared all physical tests. The Tribunal ultimately, by final order dated 05.08.2024, directed the respondents to appoint her as Police Constable. She completed training and was given a posting order. About two years after her appointment, she filed the present writ petition, seeking to quash certain paragraphs of the Tribunal's order dated 09.02.2024 regarding seniority and to direct fixation of her seniority under OBC category among provisionally selected women candidates in the select list published on 22.03.2022 under the 2018 notification. The core legal issue was whether the petitioner, who had been initially disqualified in the long jump and later selected only because of an interim order, could claim seniority with the candidates selected in the first list of 2018 recruitment, or whether her seniority should be fixed according to the list in which she was actually included after the second opportunity. The petitioner contended that since she applied under the 2018 notification and ultimately cleared the selection, her seniority must be fixed with the 2018 batch and the select list published on 22.03.2022. The respondents argued that the writ petition was liable to be dismissed on grounds of delay and laches, and that the department had implemented the Tribunal's order by appointing her; she could not claim inclusion in the first select list because she was initially disqualified and was given a concession by the interim order. The High Court noted that the petitioner was declared disqualified in the long jump on 08.02.2022. Only by virtue of the interim order of the Tribunal was she permitted to participate in the next selection process. Consequently, she was appointed and included in the select list published on 26.02.2022. The court observed that this was a concession extended to her and she could not expect any further concession by seeking inclusion in the first select list. The court also noted the delay and laches argument but ultimately dismissed the petition on merits. The court dismissed the writ petition as devoid of merits, with no costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Seniority Fixation - A candidate declared disqualified in a physical efficiency test and later selected only by virtue of an interim order granting a second opportunity cannot claim seniority with the earlier select list; seniority must be fixed according to the select list in which the candidate was actually appointed - Not mentioned - The petitioner took the physical test on 08.02.2022, cleared PST and 200 metre race but was disqualified in long jump. Pursuant to an interim order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, she was permitted to participate a second time and cleared the tests; she was then appointed and included in the select list published on 26.02.2022. The High Court held that this was a concession and she cannot expect any further concession by seeking inclusion in the first select list published on 22.03.2022; the writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits (Paras 2-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a candidate who was disqualified in the long jump during the initial physical test for Police Constable recruitment and later selected only pursuant to an interim order of the Tribunal is entitled to have her seniority fixed with candidates selected under the 2018 recruitment notification and in the first select list published on 22.03.2022.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits; no costs.
Law Points
- A candidate initially disqualified in physical efficiency test and later selected through interim order cannot claim seniority in earlier select list
- Seniority to be fixed according to selection list where candidate actually appointed
- Concession of second opportunity does not extend to inclusion in first select list
- Delay and laches may bar writ petition
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (08) 7
S.M. Subramaniam, N. Senthilkumar
Mr.K.S.Ilangovan for M/s.Achari and Antoni Associates (Petitioner); Mr.R.Syed Mustafa, Spl. Govt. Pleader (Puducherry) for Respondents 1 to 4; R5 Tribunal (CAT)
1. Union of India, Rep. by Chief Secretary, Chief Secretariat, U.T. of Puducherry; 2. The Officer on Special Duty (OSD), O/o. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Chairman of the Recruitment Committee, Police Headquarters, Government of Puducherry; 3. The Superintendent of Police (HQ), Police Department, Government of Puducherry; 4. The Superintendent of Police (I/C), Police Department, Government of Puducherry; 5. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Branch, Chennai.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal regarding fixation of seniority for the post of Police Constable in the Police Department, Government of Puducherry.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of paragraphs 5.6, 5.7 and 6.1 of the Central Administrative Tribunal order dated 09.02.2024 in O.A.310/00093/2022, and a direction to correct the petitioner's seniority under OBC category among provisionally selected women candidates in Annexure-II of Notification dated 22.03.2022.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was disqualified in the long jump event during the initial physical test on 08.02.2022; she was later selected through a second opportunity granted by interim order, but the Tribunal did not grant her seniority with the 2018 select list as she claimed.
Previous Decisions
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, passed an interim order permitting the petitioner to participate again in PST/PET; by final order dated 05.08.2024 directed the respondents to appoint her as Police Constable. The impugned order dated 09.02.2024 in O.A.No.93 of 2022 dealt with seniority but did not grant inclusion in the first select list.
Issues
Whether the petitioner, initially disqualified in long jump and later selected pursuant to an interim order, is entitled to have her seniority fixed with candidates selected under the 2018 recruitment notification and first select list published on 22.03.2022.
Whether the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on grounds of delay and laches.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner contended that she applied pursuant to the 2018 recruitment notification, participated in the selection process of 2018, and therefore her seniority must be fixed along with candidates selected under the 2018 notification and the select list published on 22.03.2022.
Respondents contended that the writ petition is liable to be rejected on the ground of delay and laches; the department implemented the CAT order and issued appointment order; the petitioner cannot claim inclusion in the first select list because she was disqualified in long jump and was extended a concession by the interim order.
Ratio Decidendi
A candidate who was disqualified in a physical efficiency test and later selected only by virtue of an interim order granting a second opportunity cannot claim seniority with the earlier select list; the concession of participating in the next selection process does not extend to inclusion in the first select list. Seniority must be determined based on the select list in which the candidate was actually appointed.
Judgment Excerpts
The Order of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Chennai Bench dated 09.02.2024 passed in O.A.No.93 of 2022 is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.
Thus, allowing petitioner to participate 2nd time in the physical test itself is a concession extended by CAT, considering the meritorious marks secured by petitioner.
Contention of petitioner is untenable in view of the fact that she was declared disqualified in long jump event. By virtue of interim order passed by CAT, she was permitted to participate in the next selection process. Accordingly, she was appointed and included in the select list, which was published on 26.02.2022. This being the concession extended to petitioner, she cannot expect any further concession, seeking inclusion of her name in the 1st select list.
Hence, the present Writ Petition, being devoid of merits, is dismissed. No costs.
Procedural History
The petitioner applied for the post of Police Constable pursuant to the 2018 recruitment notification. She cleared the written examination and participated in PST/PET held from 19.01.2022 to 11.02.2022. On 08.02.2022, she was disqualified in the long jump after clearing PST and 200 metre race. She filed O.A.No.93 of 2022 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench. The Tribunal passed an interim order permitting her to participate again in PST/PET. In her second attempt, she cleared the tests. By final order dated 05.08.2024, the Tribunal directed the respondents to appoint her as Police Constable. She completed training and received posting order. After about two years from the date of appointment, she filed W.P.No.25279 of 2026 challenging the Tribunal's order dated 09.02.2024 regarding seniority. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on 05.08.2026.
