Disposed

Partha Pratim Bora v. the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC2 Apr 2024WP(C)/1300/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by an OBC candidate denied appointment as Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces because he had availed Assam-specific height and chest relaxation despite scoring higher than some selected General Category candidates. The Court held the relaxation could not bar General Category consideration and directed appointment when vacancy arises after verification.

What the court decided

AI extract

Partha Pratim Bora Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010046682024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1300/2024

¶5

PARTHA PRATIM BORA

¶6

S/O SRI ARUN BORA, R/O VILL- PULIBOR GONDHIA GAON, NEAR KHABAR PRESS, JORHAT, DIST- JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785006

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-1100101

¶9

2:UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110001

¶10

3:STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN LODHI ROAD BLOCK NO. 12 CGO COMPLEX NEW DELHI-110003

¶11

4:REGIONAL DIRECTOR (NER) STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION HOUSEFED COMPLEX LAST GATE- BASISTHA ROAD P.O.-ASSAM SACHIVALAYA DISPUR GUWAHATI 78100

¶12

Page No.# 2/3

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R SARMA

¶14

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

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

03.04.2024

¶19

Heard Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B. Sharma, learned CGC for all the respondents.

¶20

2. The petitioner belongs to OBC category and has participated in a selection process for recruitment to the post of Constable (GD) in the Central Armed Police Forces pursuant to an advertisement dated 21.07.2018. Though petitioner belongs to the Reserved Category candidate, he secured more marks than some of the selected General Category candidates in the selection process. However, appointment order was not issued to the petitioner on the ground that he had availed of the chest and height relaxation prescribed for all candidates of the State of Assam. Therefore, the stand of the respondents is that the petitioner could have been considered only for Reserved Category and not for General Category post.

¶21

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this case is covered by the order dated 05.01.2024 passed in WP(C) No.7588/2023.

¶22

4. Ms. B. Sharma, learned CGC also fairly submits that the present case is covered by the order dated 05.01.2024 passed in WP(C) No.7588/2023. She also submits that the petitioner can be appointed against General Category post provided his marks are higher than the last selected General Category candidates.

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the order dated 05.01.2024 passed in WP(C) No.7588/2023, this Court finds that the present case is a covered case.

¶25

6. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that relaxation in height and chest availed by the petitioner cannot disentitle him for consideration against the General Candidate vacancies if he has secured more marks than the last selected General Category candidates.

¶26

7. In view of above, this Court directs the respondents to accommodate the petitioner as and when vacancy arises to the post of Constable (GD) in any Central Armed Police Forces after verifying whether the petitioner has secured higher marks than the last selected General Category candidates.

¶27

8. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Partha Pratim Bora v. the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Partha Pratim Bora v. the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmendra Boro Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Mrs. Champawati Patar Vs the Government of Assam and 7 Ors.

Deepali Ravi Vs the Gauhati High Court and 11 Ors.

Ferdadul Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mobarak Ali Vs Jayant Narlikar, IAS

Pranjit Talukdar Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.