The Delhi High Court on Friday ruled that the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has the jurisdiction to hear disputes relating to process of recruitment to armed forces [Union of India v Kapil Gurjar].
However, the Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Madhu Jain also clarified that any dispute relating to a service matter or the pleas of a person who has already joined the armed forces would stand excluded from CAT jurisdiction.
“In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that the learned Tribunal has rightly concluded that it has jurisdiction to entertain a dispute relating to the recruitment process to an Armed Force, provided such dispute is not raised by a person who is already a member of the Armed Forces. We answer the question of jurisdiction of the learned Tribunal accordingly,” the Bench ruled.
The High Court rendered the findings as it dismissed the Central government’s challenge to a decision by the full bench of the CAT which held that it had the jurisdiction to entertain a challenge to the recruitment process for appointment to the Railway Protection Force (RPF).
The dispute arose from a 2018 RPF recruitment in which one Kapil Gurjar cleared all tests but was declared medically unfit due to prior LASIK surgery. After CAT ordered his appointment in 2022, the Union challenged the ruling, arguing that CAT lacked jurisdiction.
Rejecting this argument, the High Court distinguished between service matters of existing members of armed forces and disputes raised by candidates during the recruitment stage.
The Court noted that Section 2(a) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, excludes only “members” of armed forces from CAT’s jurisdiction, meaning individuals who have already been appointed.
The Bench further held that while service-related disputes of serving RPF personnel are barred from CAT’s jurisdiction, recruitment disputes raised by candidates who are not yet members of the force are not excluded.
The Court observed that the RPF is also recognised as a Group ‘A’ Central Civil Service, bringing recruitment matters within CAT’s remit under Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
It added that finding is only with respect to CAT's jurisdiction and that the government's challenge to Gurjar's recruitment will be listed before the roster bench.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma, Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Nitinjya Chaudhry and advocates Vidhi Gupta, Rahul Mourya and Amit Gupta appeared for the Union of India.
Kapil Gurjar was represented by advocate Ravi Kumar.
[Read Judgment]