.jpeg){kind=small}
Case Analysis Subedar Major Ashok Kumar Verma (Retd) vs Ministry Of Defence & Anr 2026 DHC 5230-DB
Selection Confers No Vested Right to Appointment: Delhi High Court Upholds Cancellation of Recruitment Process for Valid Administrative Reasons
1. Case Snapshot
Case Name: Subedar Major Ashok Kumar Verma (Retd) vs Ministry Of Defence & Anr.
Citation: W.P.(C) 12661/2019
High Court: High Court of Delhi
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash Shukla and Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Hari Shankar
Date of Judgment: 1st July, 2026
Area of Law: Service Law, Constitutional Law, Recruitment, Public Employment
2. Judgment in Brief
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a retired Junior Commissioned Officer challenging the cancellation of a recruitment process for the post of Civilian Assistant Security Officer (CASO). The petitioner had participated in the selection process and secured the highest marks among selected candidates. However, no appointment order was issued due to administrative uncertainty regarding the competent authority for approval. After nearly three years of unresolved file movement, the competent authority decided to cancel the process and initiate fresh recruitment. The Court held that inclusion in a select list does not confer any indefeasible right to appointment, and the State is not bound to fill vacancies. The cancellation was based on valid administrative reasons—prolonged delay and procedural uncertainty—and was neither arbitrary nor mala fide. The Court upheld the CAT's order and dismissed the petition.
3. Relevant Facts
Recruitment Notification
On 03.03.2016, the Ministry of Defence invited applications for three posts of Civilian Assistant Security Officer (CASO) on deputation/re-employment basis.
Applicants were required to be Armed Forces personnel of the rank of JCO or equivalent, having less than one year of service left or those to be transferred to the reserve within one year.
The maximum age for appointment was 56 years.
The appointment was to be governed by applicable Recruitment Rules.
Selection Process
The petitioner applied and was called for an interview on 15.05.2018.
Three candidates were selected, with the petitioner securing the highest marks.
Administrative Uncertainty
The case was forwarded for issuance of a
... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.