Priya Kumari Vs Union of India — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Priya Kumari Vs Union of India — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ application disposed of with liberty/direction to the petitioner to file a representation/application before the concerned respondents seeking consideration of her candidature under the UR category; respondents to decide it in accordance with law and strictly in line with their letter dated 04.11.2023 (Annexure-10), completing the entire exercise within 12 weeks of receipt. No declaration on the validity of clause 4 of the advertisement; prayer to stay recruitment/earmark a G.D. post not granted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who admittedly succeeded even in the UR category (scoring more than the last selected OBC candidate's 98.64 and UR candidate's 101.29 marks), could be denied appointment solely because her caste certificate was of Uttar Pradesh rather than of the State/UT applied for, as required by clause 4 of the advertisement. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the submissions, clause 4 of the advertisement and the letter dated 04.11.2023 issued to the petitioner, the writ application is disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the concerned respondents by filing a representation/application to consider her case under the UR category.

Key takeaways

Upon receipt of the representation/application, the concerned respondents shall decide the issue in accordance with law and strictly in the line of the letter dated 04.11.2023.ratio¶29
The entire exercise of considering the petitioner's representation under the UR category shall be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such application/representation.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service law – Recruitment (BSF/CAPFs, recruitment year 2022) – Writ petition under Article 226-type reliefs (certiorari/mandamus) by OBC candidate holding a Uttar Pradesh caste certificate who secured more than 104 marks, above the last selected candidates in both OBC (98.64) and unreserved (101.29) categories – Appointment withheld because clause 4 of the advertisement (Annexure-A) imposed a condition precedent that the caste certificate must belong to the State/UT for which the job was applied – Impugned letter dated 03.11.2023 (Annexure-9) demanded a Jharkhand OBC certificate within two days – Court did not adjudicate the validity of clause 4; disposed of the writ application directing the petitioner to approach the respondents for consideration under the UR category pursuant to respondents' letter dated 04.11.2023 (Annexure-10), which respondents were to decide in accordance with law and strictly in its line within 12 weeks of receipt of the representation.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(S) No. 7302 of 2023

Priya Kumari, aged about 20 years, having date of birth 14.06.2003, daughter of Dinesh Kumar, resident of Jhopri Near Dhurwa Police Station, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi (Jharkhand) … ... Petitioner

Versus

1. Union of India

Director General, C.R.P.F. (Recruitment Branch) East Block 07 Level 4, Sector 1, R.K. Puram, New Delhi, P.O. and P.S. R.K. Puram, District Delhi (110066) (Ministry of Home Affairs).

Staff Selection Commission, Block No.12, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003.

Director General, Training Centre and School B.S.F., Meru, Hazaribag, P.O., P.S. and District Hazaribag, PIN Code 825317.

Deputy Commandant/Recruitment Wing Officer, Training Centre and School B.S.F., Meru, Hazaribag, P.O., P.S. and District Hazaribag, PIN Code 825317. … … Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Bahadur Singh, Advocate Dr. Shiw Bachan Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, CGC --------

Order No. 10 /Dated: 19^th September 2024

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The instant writ application has been preferred by the

petitioner for following reliefs:

“(i) For issuance of writ of certiorari or appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) or writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to recruit /appoint the petitioner in B.S.F. (Boarder Security Force) on the basis of result published, marks obtained and offer of appointment issued in favour of petitioner.

(ii) For issuance of appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) or writ of mandamus to direct the Respondents to appoint the petitioner on the basis of Central Government Advertisement in which same Certificates of category (caste) is applicable for everywhere in India.

(iii) For direction to the Respondents to appoint the petitioner in unreserved category if at all the petitioner does not complete the criterion as O.B.C. in State of Jharkhand.

(iv) For issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing of Letter No. ए . 9602/ भ्ቔी / आ० ( जीडी )/ ्ቚ . के . वि /2022 /17076-77 dated 03.11.2023 (Annexure-9) directing the petitioner to produce the OBC Certificate obtained from

1

Jharkhand State within two days from the date of issue of aforesaid letter. (v)For direction to the Respondents to stay the further actions in the matter of recruitment of the concerned recruitment year of 2022 till the petitioner's case is not finalized and/or to ear mark a post of G.D. in Jharkhand B.S.F. (N) Category for the year 2022.

(vi) Be pleased to pass any such order or orders, direction(s), writ(s) Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to OBC category and secured more than 104 marks in OBC category. The last selected candidate in OBC category and UR category secured 98.64 and 101.29 marks respectively. Admittedly the petitioner has succeeded even in UR category but only for the reason of clause 4 of the advertisement (Annexure-A to the counter affidavit) giving condition precedent for annexing a caste certificate which must belong to the State/UT for which the job has been applied; is not in accordance with law, and only for that reason, she is not being offered appointment letter.

Learned counsel for the respondents justifies the action of the respondents and reiterated clause 4 of the advertisement that candidate must be a citizen of India and vacancies in CAPFs & AR are State/UT/ area-wise; hence the candidate must submit domicile/PRC against his/her State/UT but the petitioner has submitted the caste certificate of Uttar Pradesh.

However, learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that since the petitioner has secured more marks than the last cut-off in UR category, as such a letter was issued to her on 04.11.2023 (Annexure-10 to the writ application). Learned counsel for the respondents submits that even now she can approach the concerned respondents to look into the matter since the petitioner has secured more marks than the last cut-off in the UR category to consider her candidature under UR category in terms of letter dated 04.11.2023.

In reply to the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given liberty to approach the concerned respondents so that her case shall be considered in view of letter dated 04.11.2023 (Annexure-10 to the writ application).

2

Having regard to the aforesaid submission and looking to clause 4 of the advertisement coupled with the letter dated 04.11.2023 issued to the petitioner, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the concerned respondents by filing representation/application to consider her case under UR category.

The moment the said representation/application is received by the concerned respondents they shall decide the issue in accordance with law and strictly in the line of the letter dated 04.11.2023. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such application/representation.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

Amit

AFR/NAFR

3