Allahabad High Court
Ashutosh Prajapati vs State Of U.P.& 2 Ors. on 1 October, 2013
Bench: Rajes Kumar, Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 54455 of 2013
Petitioner :- Ashutosh Prajapati
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 2 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Srivastava,Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,V.P.Mathur
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar,J.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Sri V.P. Varshney counsel appearing on behalf of the Commission.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has applied for the post of Lecturer in the Engineering Branches in pursuance of the advertisement 6/2011-12 dated 17.03.2012 issued by Public Service Commision, Uttar Pradesh in Government Polytechnic which is annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. The petitioner applied under OBC category. It is the claim of the petitioner that he has filed a caste certificate which is annexure No. 4 to the writ petition. Petitioner has been called upon to appear in an interview held on 26.11.2012. Since the caste certificate was not in a proper format and on the undertaking given by the petitioner, he has been allowed 21 days's time to furnish the said certificate in a prescribed format. According the petitioner caste certificate in prescribed format has been sent by the speed post on 20.02.2013 and has been further delivered on 4.03.2013. 21 days' time expired on 16.12.2012. It appears that since the petitioner has filed the caste certificate in prescribed format after the time allowed by the Commission, the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that insofar as contents of the caste certificate is concerned, there is no difference between the certificate dated 17.05.2012 filed by the petitioner and the subsequent certificate issued which has been filed on 20.02.2013 and therefore, the petitioner's candidature should not be disturbed.
We do not find any substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the advertisement itself, general instruction provided. For the purposes of present case, Clause 11 and 13.5 are relevant which are being reproduced as below:-
Clause-11 : that the candidate coming under the reserved category desiring benefit of the reservation must indicate in the prescribed column of the on-line application, the category/sub-category (one or more than one) whatever may be and if they fail to do so they will be treated like a general candidate and the benefit of reservation will not be admissible to them.
Clause-13.5: under any reserved category/categories for the confirmation of the claim for reservation. The caste certificate issued by District Magistrate/Additional District Magistrate (Executive) City Magistrate, SDM/Tehsildar in the prescribed format under Government order No. 22/16/92-TC-III/Ka dated 22.10.2008 should be filed.
Admittedly the petitioner has not filed the caste certificate in prescribed format under the Government Order dated 22.10.2008 and, therefore, as per Clause 11 of the instructions, the petitioner should be treated as general category candidate. However, the petitioner at the time of interview has been provided one more opportunity on his undertaking being given to furnish the caste certificate in a prescribed format within a period of 21 days which expired on 16.12.2012. Admittedly, the petitioner has send the caste certificate in a prescribed format on 20.02.2013 by speed post and further submitted on 04.03.2013 much after expiry of the time allowed by the Commission.
Therefore, we are of the view that candidature of the petitioner has been rightly rejected. It is made clear that it is not the case of the petitioner that in the absence of caste certificate, petitioner would be considered under the general category.
In view of above, petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 1.10.2013
Jaswant
