Allowed

Rakesh Kumar Shukla S/O Shri Ram Swaroop Shukla v. Union of India

Rajasthan HC5 Feb 2024CW/4137/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged the Tribunal's order dismissing a Group 'D' recruitment application where the Ex-army petitioner failed to produce a matric certificate. The High Court held the rejection unsustainable and quashed the impugned order, directing respondent to consider the case subject to other eligibility criteria post date 21.04.2022.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order of the Tribunal was quashed. Respondents directed to consider petitioner's case for appointment to Group 'D' posts for Ex-serviceman category subject to availability of post.

Rakesh Kumar Shukla S/O Shri Ram Swaroop… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:5926-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4137/2022

¶4

Rakesh Kumar Shukla S/o Shri Ram Swaroop Shukla, Aged About 52 Years, (Ex Armyman) R/o Kunj Bihar Colony, Phase-I, Near Water Tank Bhind Road, Gole Ka Mandir, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh-474005.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Union Of India, Through The General Manager, North Western Railway Head Quarter, Jagatpura, Jaipur.

¶8

Chairman, Railway Recruitment Cell, North Western Railway, Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Singh Rathore Mr. Girraj Prasad For Respondent(s) : Ms. Nidhi Khandelwal

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA

Order

REPORTABLE

05/02/2024

AVNEESH JHINGAN, J(Oral):-

¶16

This petition is filed challenging order dated 17.01.2022 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short, “Tribunal”) dismissing the original application (for brevity, “O.A.”) of the petitioner.

¶17

The brief facts are that the North Western Railway issued notification dated 14.12.2013 for recruitment of Group ‘D’ posts. The petitioner applied in the category of Ex-serviceman, having served in Indian Army. Petitioner passed the written test and the physical efficiency test. The candidature of the petitioner was

[2024:RJ-JP:5926-DB]

[CW-4137/2022]

(2 of 4)

rejected during the verification of the documents as he failed to produce the matric certificate albeit, the certificates issued by the Board of Secondary Education Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal (for short, “Board”) for class XIth, XIIth, marksheet of graduation from Jiwaji University, as well as certificate of graduation issued by Indian Army were produced.

¶22

The Tribunal dismissed O.A. on the ground that it was mandatory to produce matric certificate and on failure to do so the candidature was rightly rejected. The prayer of the petitioner that the matriculation certificate got during the pendency of the O.A. be considered was rejected.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had passed class XIth, XIIth, graduated from Jiwaji University, Gwalior and was issued graduation certificate under Army Rules yet his candidature was rejected. It is argued that as per the advertisement, the minimum qualification was of class Xth and candidates having higher qualification could also apply.

¶24

Learned counsel for the respondent defending the impugned order, submits that matric certificate was not produced. Reliance is placed upon Clause 17.4 of the notification to submit that admission of the candidates at all stages of recruitment was provisional, subject to satisfying the eligibility conditions. The contention is that in absence of matric certificate, petitioner was not eligible for Group ‘D’ post.

¶25

While issuing notice of motion on 21.04.2022, interim directions were issued for keeping one post vacant (if available) in category of Ex-serviceman quota, in pursuant to notification No.3/2013.

¶26

(3 of 4) [CW-4137/2022]

¶27

[2024:RJ-JP:5926-DB]

¶28

Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to reproduce Clause 7 of the advertisement:-

¶29

“7.1 Minimum 10^th Pass or ITI or equivalent at the time of applying.

¶30

7.2 Candidates having higher Educational Qualification can also apply.”

¶31

The education qualification prescribed in advertisement is unambiguous that the minimum qualification required was class Xth or ITI or equivalent. The candidates having higher qualification were also entitled to apply for the jobs. It is undisputed case that the petitioner is graduate and had produced certificates of the Board for class XIth and XIIth and the marksheet of graduation from Jiwaji University, Gwalior. During the pendency of the O.A. petitioner produced a certificate dated 30.04.1985 issued by Government Higher Secondary Technical School, Satna, Madhya Pradesh, stating that for the year 1985, general promotions were given to students as the class Xth Board examination were not held. To similar effect is the Transfer Certificate issued by Education Department, Madhya Pradesh dated 05.07.1985 specifying that the petitioner passed class Xth by general promotion and thereafter was studying in Class XIth.

¶32

There is an other aspect of the matter that in graduation certificate dated 30.10.2012 issued by the Indian Army, it is stated that the Ex-servicemen who are matriculates and had put not less than 15 years of service in armed forces shall be eligible for appointment under the reserved vacancies for which essential qualification is graduation. The petitioner was issued graduation certificate by Army authorities as he was matriculate and served Indian Army for 22 years. The Chairman, Railways Recruitment Board, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh on 27.04.2015 issued a

(4 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JP:5926-DB]

[CW-4137/2022]

clarification, that the graduation certificate issued by Army was to be considered valid for the posts having eligibility qualifications prescribed as graduation.

¶37

In view of the above discussion, the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner for non-production of matric certificate is unsustainable, the impugned order of the Tribunal is quashed. The respondent shall consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to Group ‘D’ posts in pursuance to the notification No.3/2013, on fulfillment of other eligibility criteria and subject to availability of post as on 21.04.2022, in the category of Exserviceman.

¶38

The writ petition is allowed.

¶39

(SHUBHA MEHTA),J

¶40

(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J

¶41

LAKSHYA SHARMA-DAKSH/16

Rakesh Kumar Shukla S/O Shri Ram Swaroop Shukla v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Shukla S/O Shri Ram Swaroop Shukla v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tirupati Plastomatics Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Finance Departmentors

Tirupati Plastomatics Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Finance Departmentors

Tirupati Plastomatics Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Finance Departmentors

Tirupati Plastomatics Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Finance Departmentors

Late Shri Shyam Mohan Rawat, Son of Late Shri Puran Mal Rawat Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1)

Balram Meena S/O Late Sh. Ramraj Meena Vs Union of India