Allahabad High Court
Deep Chandra Chaurasiya vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 9 October, 2013
Bench: Rajes Kumar, Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. 33 AFR
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 56401 of 2013
Deep Chandra Chaurasiya........................................................Petitioner.
Vs.
State of U.P. and others...........................................................Respondents.
Hon. Rajes Kumar, J.
Hon. M.C. Tripathi, J.
Heard Sri H.R. Mishra, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Sri V.P. Mathur, Advocate, appears on behalf of respondent no. 3.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has applied for the post of Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering in pursuance of the advertisement no. 6/2011-12 dated 17.03.2012 issued by the Public Service Commission, which is Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. The petitioner filed caste certificate, which is Annexure-5 to the writ petition. The petitioner has been called upon to appear in interview held on 26.11.2012. Since the caste certificate was not in a proper proforma and on the undertaking given by the petitioner, he has been allowed 21 days' time to furnish the said certificate. According to the petitioner, he got a fresh OBC certificate dated 4.12.2012, issued by the Tehsildar, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) in a prescribed proforma and filed the same on 7.12.2012 and went on Gate No. 3 of the U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad where his name and address have been noted for the purpose of depositing the caste certificate and after that the petitioner went on service window no. 12 (Sewa Patal no. 12) and personally handed over the caste certificate. The said caste certificate is Annesure-5 to the writ petition. The result was declared on 4.1.2013 and in the select list, the petitioner was at serial no. 29 and against the name of the petitioner, the word provisional was mentioned. In the select list, the petitioner's selection has been shown as provisionally. He filed representation dated 2.7.2013 before respondent no. 3 giving full details of depositing caste certificate. When the petitioner could not get any information, he sought information on 1.8.2013 under the Right to Information Act. By the letter dated 2.9.2013, the petitioner has been informed that since the petitioner could not submit the OBC certificate in a prescribed proforma within 21 days as such his selection has been cancelled. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner initially filed OBC caste certificate, which is Annexure-3 to the writ petition, and further submitted that he has filed a fresh caste certificate on 4.12.2012, which is Annexure-5 to the writ petition, therefore, the rejection of selection of the petitioner is wholly unjustified.
Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 submitted that both caste certificates filed by the petitioner were not in accordance to the Government Order no. 22/16/92/T.C.-III, dated 20.10.2008, which was required to be filed as contemplated in the advertisement itself and, therefore, the petitioner's candidature under the OBC category has been rejected. A prescribed proforma has also been produced by the learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 for perusal.
We do not find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. We have perused both caste certificates, filed by the petitioner initially on 2.7.2009 , which is Annexure-3 to the writ petition, and further filed on 4.12.2012, which is Annexure-5 to the writ petition. Both the certificates are not in accordance to Government Order no. 22/16/92/T.C.-III, dated 20.10.2008. In the advertisement itself, general instructions are 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.
One of the samples of caste certificate in the prescribed proforma is as below :
mRrj izns'k 'kklu
mRrj izns'k ds fiNM+h tkfr ds fy, tkfr izek.k i=
ftyk egksck
rglhy pj[kkjh tkjh fnukad 03-02-2013
vkosnu dz0 39003130000506
izek.k i= dz0 390231300049
izekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS fd Jh vk'kqrks"k iztkifr
[email protected]=h Jh izgykn iztkifr
fuoklh egkjktiqjk dqEgkjuMsjk
xzke egjktiqjk
rglhy pj[kkjh
ftyk egksck
mRrj izns'k dh dqEgkj tkfr ds O;fDr gSA ;g mRrj izns'k yksd lsok vuqlwfpr tkfr;ksa] vuqlwfpr tu tkfr;ksa ;k vU; fiNM+s oxksZa ds fy, vkj{k.k vf/kfu;e 1994 dh vuqlwph ,d ds vUrxZr ekU;rk izkIr gSA
;g Hkh izekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS fd Jh vk'kqrks"k iztkifr iwoksZDr vf/kfu;e 1994 ¼;Fkk la'kksf/kr½ dh vuqlwph 2 ¼tSlk fd mRrj izns'k yksd lsok½ vuqlwfpr tkfr;ksa] vuqlwfpr tutkfr;ksa vkSj vU; fiNM+s oxksZa ds fy, vkj{k.k ¼la'kks/ku½ vf/kfu;e 2001 }kjk izfrLFkkfir fd;k x;k gS ,oa tks m0iz0 yksd lsok vuqlwfpr tkfr;ksa] vuqlwfpr tutkfr;ksa vkSj vU; fiN+M+s oxksZa ds fy, vkj{k.k ¼la'kks/ku½ vf/kfu;e 2002 ,oa 'kklukns'k la[;k [email protected]@92 Vh0lh0&AAA] fnukad 20 vDVwcj 2008 }kjk la'kksf/kr dh xbZ gS] ls vkPNkfnr ugh gSA buds ekrk&firk dh fujUrj rhu o"kksZa dh vof/k ds fy;s ldy okf"kZd vk; ikWp yk[k :i;s ;k blls vf/kd ugh gS rFkk buds ikl /ku dj vf/kfu;e 1957 esa rFkk fofgi ----- lhek ls vf/kd lEifRr ugh gSA
tkjhdrkZ dsUnz% lkbcj bUQksMso l{ke vf/[email protected]
lkbcj bUQksMso] dsUnz izHkkjh fMftVy gLrk{kfjr
LFkku% [email protected] egksck] pj[kkjh] egksck
fnukad 03-02-2013 fnukad 03-02-2013
gLrk{kj ,oa eqgj
Admittedly, the petitioner has not filed the caste certificate in prescribed proforma under the Government Order dated 22.10.2008 and, therefore, as per Clause-11 of the instruction, the petitioner should be treated under the 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 the petitioner failed to furnish. It is not the case of the petitioner that non-furnishing of caste certificate as per Clause-11 of the instruction, he should have been considered under the General Category. In case if he would have been considered under the General Category he would not have been selected on merit.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be allowed to furnish the caste certificate in a proper formate.
Since the period of filing the caste certificate has already expired and final select list has been declared, there is no reason to give further time to the petitioner to file caste certificate.
We do not find any merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
9.10.2013
OP
