A candidate denied appointment as Constable (GD) despite higher marks than a general category candidate sought relief similar to an earlier writ. Noting inordinate delay in approaching the Court but respondents' absence, the Court disposed of the petition on the lines of the earlier order.
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.# 1/4
GAHC010181662024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4572/2024
PHANIDHAR GOGOI S/O- TULSHI GOGOI, R/O- VILLAGE- RANCHALI GAON, P.O RANCHALI, P.S- KHOWANG, DIST- DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN-785675
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, PIN- 110001
2:THE STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY BLOCK NO.12 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003
3:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION REGIONAL OFFICE RUKMININAGAR GUWAHATI- 781006
4:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
BORDER SECURITY FORCE (BSF) BLOCK NO. 10 LODHI ROAD PRAGATI VIHAR NEW DELHI- 110003
Page No.# 2/4
5:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE (CISF) BLOCK NO. 13 CGO COMPLEX NEW DELHI- 110003
6:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE (CRPF) CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003
7:DIRECTOR GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES NONGRIMMAW LAITUMUKHRAH GORALINE SHILLON MEGHALAYA- 793011 8:DIRECTOR GENERAL INDO TIBETAN BORDER FORCE (ITBP) BLOCK NO. 10 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003 9:DIRECTOR GENERAL SHAHASRA SEEMA BAL (SSB) 5-6 VIVEKANANDA MARG EAST BLOCK R.K. PURAM NEW DELHI- 11002
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI, MS. D. DEVI,MS K BARMAN,MS CHITRALEKHA DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MS J SARMAH (CGC )
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
ORDER
Date : 09/09/2024
Page No.# 3/4
Heard Mr. K. R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. None has appeared for the respondents although the name of the learned DSGI/CGC is duly reflected in the cause list.
The writ petitioner herein had participated in the selection process conducted by the Staff Selection Commission (SSSC) on the basis of the advertisement notice dated 21/07/2018 for filling up various posts of Constables (GD) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), NIA & SSF and Riflemen (GD) in the Assam Rifles.
The petitioner claims to be a candidate belonging to the OBC category. Being a reserved category candidate from the North Eastern Region (NER), the authorities had earlier extended relaxation on height and chest measurement to such candidates hailing from the NER. Although, such relaxation had nothing to do with the merit position of the respective candidate and notwithstanding the fact that the writ petitioner had secured higher marks than the general category candidate in the selection process, appointment order was denied to him erroneously. Hence, this writ petition.
Mr. Patgiri has invited the attention of this Court to the similar orders passed by this Court in WP(C) 3783/2023. By relying upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Hemant Pokhriyal Vs. Staff Selection Commission [WP(C) 4982/2021] and Arpan Chowdhury Vs. Union of India and others decide by the Tripura High Court in WP(C) 117/2021 , the learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that similarly situated candidates, having similar nature of grievance, have already been granted relief by this Court and, therefore, a similar order be passed in the present case as well.
The learned counsel for the respondents are not present to oppose the prayer made by the writ petitioner.
It is noticed that in a similar writ petition being WP(C) 3783/2023, this Court had passed order dated 28/06/2023 disposing of the writ petition with the following observations and directions :-
“Taking note of the submission advanced by learned counsel for both the sides, this
Page No.# 4/4
writ petition is hereby disposed of by providing that subject to availability of vacancy, the respondents may issue order 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.
With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.”
It is true that the petitioner appears to be similarly situated as the writ petitioner in WP(C) 3783/2023 and, therefore, ordinarily he would be entitled to similar relief. However, it is also seen that there has been inordinate delay on the part of the writ petitioner in approaching this Court. On such count, ordinarily this Court would not have been inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner in the present case. However, since the respondents’ counsel have remained absent today, this Court is left with no other option but to dispose of the writ petition at the motion stage itself by allowing the same.
As such, this writ petition stand disposed of in the line of the observations and direction issued by this Court in the order dated 28/06/2023 passed in WP(C) No. 3783/2023, as noted herein above.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE
sukhamay
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a delayed writ petitioner denied appointment as Constable (GD) despite higher marks and OBC/NER physical relaxation entitlement deserves relief similar to WP(C) 3783/2023.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
WP(C) 3783/2023Followed
Hemant Pokhriyal Vs. Staff Selection CommissionReferred
WP(C) 4982/2021
Arpan Chowdhury Vs. Union of India and othersReferred
WP(C) 117/2021
Phanidhar Gogoi
The Union of India
The Staff Selection Commission
The Regional Director, Staff Selection Commission Regional Office, Guwahati
Director General, Border Security Force (BSF)
Director General, Central Industrial Security Force (CISF)
Suman Shyam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
