The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging a condition asking only male and not female candidates to produce a valid Driving License for consideration of their candidature to the post of Sub Inspector in Delhi Police.

The Petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing of the condition stipulated in para 7.6 of SSC Notification F.No. 3/6/2019-P&P-II published in the year 2019 wherein only male candidates were asked to produce a valid Driving License for LMV (Motorcycle and Car) for consideration of their candidature to the post of Sub Inspector in Delhi Police though no such condition was stipulated for female candidates for consideration to the same post.

The Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held, “We find that Rule 7 of the Rules, which deals with recruitment of SI (Executive) Male, contemplates that “Candidates must possess a valid driving license for LMV (Motor Cycle and Car) on the date fixed for Physical Endurance & Measurement Tests”. However, no such stipulation is found in Rule 14(a) which deals with recruitment for SI (Women). Hence, the genesis for not insisting on a valid driving license for female candidates in the impugned notification is the statutory provision of Rule 14(a) of the Rules. If that be so, the challenge to the notification by stating that it is discriminatory cannot be accepted.”

Advocate Vikas Kumar represented the Petitioner while Central Govt. Standing Counsel Leena Tuteja represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

In the year 2019, the third respondent/SSC issued the impugned notification for recruitment to the post of SI in Delhi Police, Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) and Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) in Central Industrial Security Forces (CISF). The petitioner applied for the post of SI in Delhi Police as per the notification.

It was the case of the petitioner that between July 2020 and December 2020, he repeatedly tried to get the slot for permanent driving license test but was unable to get the same before the PEMT. In 2020, the petitioner appeared in PEMT and qualified it. During this test, though the petitioner submitted a copy of his learner’s license, he was asked to submit a copy of a valid driving license during the documents verification process. Meanwhile, the petitioner shifted to his uncle’s place and was issued the driving license. In 2021, the petitioner appeared for Paper II Examination and qualified it. During the Medical Examination, the petitioner tried to submit a copy of his driving license, but the same was not accepted.

Arguments

It was the case of the petitioner that, having qualified all stages of the examination, he was denied appointment as he did not submit a valid driving license at the time of document verification. According to him, this action of the respondents was discriminatory inasmuch as only male candidates were required to produce a valid LMV driving license for consideration of their candidature, but no such condition was stipulated for female candidates.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that Rule 7 of the Rules, which deals with recruitment of SI (Executive) Male, contemplates that “Candidates must possess a valid driving license for LMV (Motor Cycle and Car) on the date fixed for Physical Endurance & Measurement Tests”. The Bench held that the challenge to the notification by stating that it was discriminatory could not be accepted.

As per the Bench, the petitioner was rightly treated as disqualified for the post of SI in Delhi Police for not producing a valid driving license on the date of PEMT, as on the said date, the petitioner neither possessed nor submitted a valid driving license. “As is clear from the above, a learner’s license cannot be equated with a driving license, at least for the purpose of fulfilling the eligibility criteria prescribed in a selection notification. In the present case, the requirement of having a valid driving license not being fulfilled by the petitioner, he was rightly disqualified”, the order read.

The Bench found that the petitioner was issued a driving license only on March 26, 2021, that too when he had shifted from New Delhi to NOIDA. “In any case, the requirement of possessing a valid driving license on the date of the PEMT, being under the Rules, the petitioner cannot submit the same at a later stage, as statutory rules cannot be given a go bye, as is sought to be pleaded by the learned counsel for the petitioner”, it added.

Thus, finding no merit in the Petition, the Bench dismissed the same.

Cause Title: Vikram Kumar Jha v. Union of India (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:3249-DB)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Vikas Kumar, Sunil Verma, Karan Gulwade

Respondent: Central Govt. Standing Counsel Leena Tuteja, Advocate Ishita Kadyan, SPC Kshitij Chhabra, Advocate Abhijeet Vikram Singh

Click here to read/download Order




Delhi High CourtJustice V Kameswar RaoJustice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.