Disposed

Jasbant @ Jashbant Lal Goala v. the Union of India and 9 Ors.

Gauhati HC19 Jun 2023WP(C)/1840/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by an unsuccessful OBC candidate for CAPFs Constable post. Relying on prior decisions holding OBC candidates entitled to appointment over General category holders with lower marks, the Court directed the respondents to appoint the petitioner in CAPFs or any other Armed Police Force within six months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to appoint the petitioner as Constable (GD) in CAPFs or any other Armed Police Force within six months of receiving the certified copy.

Jasbant @ Jashbant Lal Goala Vs the Union of India… — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010069822023

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1840/2023

¶5

JASBANT @ JASHBANT LAL GOALA S/O- SRI MUNGA LAL GOALA, VILLAGE- IRONGMARA, P.O.- IRONGMARA, P.S.- SILCHAR, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788011.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 9 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 110001.

¶8

2:THE STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN

¶9

BLOCK NO. 12 CGO COMPLEX

¶10

LODHI ROAD

¶11

NEW DELHI- 110003.

¶12

3:THE UNDER SECRETARY STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION BLOCK NO. 12 CGO COMPLEX

¶13

LODHI ROAD JLN STADIUM

¶14

Page No.# 2/5

¶15

NEW DELHI- 110091.

¶16

4:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION NORTH EASTERN REGION

¶17

HOUSEFED COMPLEX WEST END BLOCK

¶18

BASISTHA ROAD

¶19

P.O.- ASSAM SACHIVALAYA

¶20

GUWAHATI- 781006.

¶21

5:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL BSF BLOCK NO. 10 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD

¶22

NEW DELHI- 110003.

¶23

6:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL SAHASTRA SENA BAL 5-6 VIVEKANANDA MARG EAST BLOCK R.K. PURAM NEW DELHI- 22.

¶24

7:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD

¶25

NEW DELHI- 110003.

¶26

8:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL INDO TIBETAN BORDER POLICE BLOCK NO. IV CGO COMPLEX

¶27

LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003.

¶28

9:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL

¶29

Page No.# 3/5

¶30

CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE BLOCK NO. 13 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003. 10:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES NONGRIMMAW LAITUMUKHRAH GORALINE SHILLONG- 793003

¶31

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S CHAUHAN

¶32

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I.

¶33

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶34

ORDER

¶35

19.06.2023

¶36

Heard Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Roy, learned CGC, appearing for the respondents.

¶37

The petitioner herein belongs to the OBC category. In response to the advertisement notice dated 21/07/2018 for recruitment in the post of Constable (General Duty) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), the petitioner had submitted their candidature and had also participated in the selection process. However, on conclusion of the process, the petitioner was not selected. The basis for not doing so is on account of the fact that the marks obtained by the petitioner was considered along with the other candidates belong to the OBC category and it was observed that since the petitioner has availed the relaxation for chest and height measurement prescribed for the candidates

¶38

Page No.# 4/5

¶39

coming from Assam, he could not be considered along with the general category candidates. However, the fact remains that the petitioner had scored more marks than some of the general category candidates, who were ultimately selected and appointed by the authorities.

¶40

Similarly situated petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C) 3764/2021 raising a similar grievance. After taking note of the facts of the case as well as the law laid down by the Delhi High Court in Hemant Pokhriyal Vs. Staff Selection Commission & Ors. [WP(C) 4982/2021 Page No.# 3/4 decided on 01/10/2021] and also the decision rendered in the case of Arpan Chowdhury Vs. Union of India and others rendered by the Tripura High Court in connection with WP(C) 117/2021, the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the petitioners were entitled to receive orders of appointment. According, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to accommodate those petitioners in any of the CAPFs, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶41

By referring to the order dated 11/08/2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 3764/2021, Mr. Chauhan submits that this is a covered case and, therefore, be disposed of with a similar direction.

¶42

Mr. S.S. Roy, learned CGC, in his usual fairness, has conceded that the petitioner’s case would be covered by the previous decision of this Court but submits that since in the meantime, all the vacant posts of Constable (GD) in the CAPFs coming under the advertisement notice dated 21/07/2018 have already been filled up, the petitioner may be accommodated in any other Armed Police Force.

¶43

Mr. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client would

¶44

Page No.# 5/5

¶45

have no objection if such a recourse is taken as long as he is issued the order of appointment without further delay.

¶46

Taking note of the submission advanced by learned counsel for both the sides, this writ petition is hereby disposed of by providing that the respondents may issue orders of appointment to the petitioner appointing him as Constable (GD) in any of the division of the Central Armed Police Forces or in any other Armed Police Force, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶47

With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

Comparing Assistant

Jasbant @ Jashbant Lal Goala v. the Union of India and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasbant @ Jashbant Lal Goala v. the Union of India and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abu Nesar Azizul Hussain and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Md. Ashir Ali Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Mamidul Hassan Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Ranjit Kumar Deb Vs Sachibrata Choudhury and Anr.

Pratap Sing Basumatari and 8 Ors. Vs Md. V.K. Pipersenia and Anr.

Deepak Kumar Singh Vs Dr. Madhaiyaan Angamuthu and Ors.