Allowed

Annu Kumar Kanjar S/O Lal Chand Kanjar v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Nov 2022CW/5804/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the exclusion from the provisional merit list due to an SC caste certificate issued after the application deadline. The court allowed the writ petition, relying on a coordinate bench judgment that SC/ST caste is a birth-fact independent of subsequent events, directing respondents to consider the certificate and appoint the petitioner if eligible.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; respondents directed to consider petitioner's SC certificate and appoint him if eligible.

Annu Kumar Kanjar S/O Lal Chand Kanjar Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5804/2022

¶3

Annu Kumar Kanjar S/o Lal Chand Kanjar, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Vpo Bakarah, Tehsil Jahazpur, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Medical, Health And Family Welfare Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

The Director, Directorate, Ayurved Department, Rajasthan, Ajmer.

¶8

The Deputy Secretary, Ayurved And Indian Medicine Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶9

Registrar, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurveda University, Kadwad, Jodhpur-Nagaur Highway Road, Jodhpur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini Mr. Aamir Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.L. Saini, AAG with Ms. Srijana Shrestha

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

¶13

Order

¶14

10/11/2022

¶15

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition has already been considered and decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principle Seat, Jodhpur in the matter of Pushpendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2521/2022) decided on 23.02.2022, where in it has been held as under:-

¶16

“This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner requiring the respondents to

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CW-5804/2022]

¶19

consider the candidature of the petitioner as belonging to SC category for recruitment to the post of Compounder / Nurse Junior Grade and inclusion of his name in the final merit list.

¶20

It is inter alia indicated that pursuant to the advertisement the petitioner, who belongs to SC category, filled up his application form. He was called for document verification, wherein, the petitioner produced certificates dated 15.12.2010 (Annex.2), 2.3.2021 and 21.10.2021 (Annex.7) as a proof of his belonging to SC category, however, his name didn’t appear in the provisional merit list and as such the present petition has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the guidelines dated 9.9.2015 issued by the Social Justice and Empowerment Department made submissions that caste certificate for SC/ST category are for life and as such despite the fact that the certificate dated 2.3.2021 issued to the petitioner was prior to the date of application, the same could not be rejected by the respondents.

¶21

Further submissions were made that even if the certificate dated 21.10.2021 is taken into consideration as the same pertains to the caste of the petitioner as belonging to SC category, the same has to be taken into consideration even if the same has been issued after the cut-off date. Reliance has been placed on Ram Kumar Gijroya v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection: (2016)4 SCC 754. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent – University made submissions that the petitioner has produced only certificate dated 21.10.2021 and as in the condition 9.2 of the advertisement, it was specifically provided that the certificate should be before the last date of application, the same was not taken into consideration and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶22

Reliance has been placed on judgments in Raj Kumar Mahto v. State of Jharkhand & Ors.: WP(S) No.5572/2017, decided on 20.12.2019 by Jharkhand High Court and Gauraj Sharma v. State of U.P.: Special Appeal No.156/2017, decided on 4.5.2017 by Full Bench of Allahabad High Court.

¶23

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. Today, this Court in Kailash Kumar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2505/2022, a case where the candidates belongs to OBC(NCL) / MBC category, has

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CW-5804/2022]

¶26

come to the conclusion that the documents produced, after the objections were called by the respondent – University to the provisional merit list, were required to be taken into consideration.

¶27

The issue raised in the present writ petition is also covered by the said order. However, it is significant that, insofar as, the case of a candidate who belongs to SC category is concerned, the fact that a certificate is prior to or subsequent to the cut-off date, would hardly make any difference, inasmuch as, the same only pertains to the declaration of the caste of the candidate, which is a fact which occurs on the birth of the candidate and is not dependent upon subsequent event and/or the same changes on account of any subsequent event.

¶28

In any case, as the petitioner has produced the certificate dated 2.3.2021, the same has to be taken into consideration for the purpose. Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The respondents are directed to take into consideration the candidature of the petitioner based on his SC certificate (Annex.2) and in case, the petitioner is found otherwise eligible and is in merit, to include his name in the final select list / final merit list to be issued by the respondents. No order as to costs.”

¶29

Counsel appearing for the respondents has not disputed the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶30

In that view of the matter, the present writ petition stands allowed in view of the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principle Seat, Jodhpur in the matter of Pushpendra Kumar (supra).

¶31

The respondents are further directed to take into consideration the candidature of the petitioner based on his SC certificate and give him appointment on the post in question, if he otherwise eligible.

¶32

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

¶33

Upendra Pratap Singh /83

Annu Kumar Kanjar S/O Lal Chand Kanjar v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annu Kumar Kanjar S/O Lal Chand Kanjar v. the State of Rajasthan

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

Anupama Basvaraj Patne D/O Shri Basvaraj Patne Vs State of Rajasthan

Nirmal Kumar Gautam Son of Late Shri Niranjan Prasad Sharma Vs Jaipur Vidyut Vtran Nigam Ltd.

Pankaj Saini S/O Shri Ram Chandra Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikas Kumar Meena S/O Sh. Parmanand Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Man Mohan Singh S/O Sh. Sohan Lal Vs Chairman Cum Chief Managing Director

The Station Manager Indian Air Vs Kumari Chandra Alwani and Anr.