Petitioner challenged non-appointment in Assam Rifles despite medical fitness declaration. Court found petitioner's marks were lower than last selected candidate's. Petitioner admission to limited option did not grant eligibility for unfilled posts in other forces. Writ petition dismissed.
Writ petition held devoid of merit and dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010126872017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2219/2017
MANIK CHANDRA RABHA
S/O TARUN RABHA, R/O VILL. PIRAKATA, NATUN SIRAJULI, P.O. DHEKIAJULI, SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN-784110
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001
2:STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION THROUGH SECRETARY STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION BLOCK NO.12 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI-110003
3:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR NER STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION RUKMINI NAGAR P.O. ASSAM SACHIVALAYA GUWAHATI ASSAM-781006
4:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL BORDER SECURITY FORCE CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI-110003
Page No.# 2/5
CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI-110003
6:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL INDO TIBETAN BORDER POLICE FORCE CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI-11000
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRSP RAI
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
ORDER
Date : 06-06-2023
Heard Mr. H. Bezbaruah, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. R. Devi, learned CGC appearing for the respondents.
Page No.# 3/5
not find place in the said list. According to the writ petitioner, he belongs to the ST category and had scored 41 marks in the written test. Notwithstanding the same and despite the fact that the candidate from ST category who had scored 40 marks was appointed, the case of the petitioner was not considered for appointment. Hence, this writ petition.
Page No.# 4/5
in the counter-affidavit by making the following statements in paragraph 5(III), which is extracted here-in-below for ready reference:
5(III) That based on their merit and Force preference, the candidate who were declared Fit in the Review Medical Examination and who have obtained marks equal to or more than the lowest marks obtained by the candidate already selected in Select List/ Reserve List and Reserve List-2 for each CAPF and each category, were also considered for inclusion in Select List/ Reserve List and Reserve List-2 and accordingly, a Revised List was published on 30.01.2014. Since the mark obtained by the petitioner is lower than the mark obtained by the last selected ST candidate in Assam Rifles, his preferred Force, he is not considered for inclusion in the Select List. Thereafter, since the Petitioner had exercised limited option, he was again considered for inclusion in Reserve List-2 by substituting his preference to ABCDEF. In Assam, the State of domicile of the Petitioner, there were unfilled vacancies in the Select List in BSF for ST category candidates belonging to Border District with Code 01. Since the Petitioner does not belong to the Border District with Code01, he was not considered for inclusion in BSF. Moreover, the Petitioner was also not considered for the unfilled nonborder Unreserved vacancies in the Select List for ITBP and CRPF as the marks obtained by the last selected unreserved candidates in ITBP and CRPF in Reserve List2 were 46 and 52 respectively, which are higher than the marks obtained by the Petitioner.”
by the petitioner by filing rejoinder affidavit. As such, the stand of the respondent No. 2 would have to be considered as correct on facts. If that be so, regardless of the opinion of the Medical Board, the petitioner could not have been appointed in any of the forces including, Assam Rifles/ ITBP/ BSF or CRPF. Situated thus, I do not find any justifiable ground for this Court to interfere in the matter, more so, since the selection process is of the year 2011.
This writ petition is, therefore, held to be devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGE
Page No.# 5/5
GS
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment in a Central Armed Police Force despite not meeting the merit cutoff marks.
Whether the writ petitioner's case is covered under the order dated 04-01-2016 in W.P.(C) No. 5520/2012.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.(C) No. 5520/2012Referred¶26
Manik Chandra Rabha
The Union of India
Staff Selection Commission
The Regional Director, NE Region Staff Selection Commission
The Director General, Border Security Force
The Director General, Central Reserve Police Force
Suman Shyam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
