Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P Through Principal ... vs Kiran Prajapati on 25 August, 2023
Bench: Manoj Kumar Gupta, Donadi Ramesh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172289-DB
Court No. - 21
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 562 of 2023
Appellant :- State Of U.P Through Principal Secretary Department Of Human Resource(Police Station) Another
Respondent :- Kiran Prajapati
Counsel for Appellant :- Kunal Ravi Singh,Tej Bhanu Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- Ranvijay Chaubey
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.
Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.
Re: Order on Delay Condonation Application
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The appeal is reported to be beyond time by 97 days.
3. Learned counsel for the contesting respondents states that he does not wish to file any counter affidavit to the delay condonation application.
4. Cause shown for delay in filing the appeal is found to be sufficient. Accordingly, delay is condoned. The delay condonation application is allowed.
5. Office is directed to allocate regular number to the instant appeal.
Re: Memo of Appeal
1. The instant intra-court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 27.03.2023 in Writ C No. 5245 of 2023. The said writ petition was filed by the non-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'petitioner') praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to treat the petitioner as O.B.C. (Non-Creamy Layer-N.C.L.) candidate and declare her result in the said category and send her for medical test.
2. The case of the petitioner was that she applied for selection on the post of S.I. Civil Police pursuant to an advertisement issued by the appellants in February, 2021 under Female O.B.C. (N.C.L.) category. The caste certificate issued to her by Tehsildar, Azamgarh was on the format prescribed by Central Government for employment in Central Government Services. However, it specifically certifies that the petitioner belongs to O.B.C. (N.C.L.) category. The said certificate was enclosed by the petitioner along with her application form. The appellants considering the said certificate, permitted the petitioner to appear in the written examination and which she duly qualified. It was followed by document verification on 26.04.2022. She was also allowed to participate in the physical examination held on 06.05.2022. However, when final result of the aforesaid examination was declared, name of the petitioner was missing from the list. She moved a representation to the authorities, but no heed was paid to it. The final cut-off marks of the female O.B.C. category for the said examination was 285.9210526 and the petitioner had scored 287 marks, which was above the cut-off marks for the female O.B.C. category.
3. The petitioner later came to know that her candidature was not considered under O.B.C. (N.C.L.) category, but as a general candidate, as the caste certificate submitted by her, was not on prescribed format.
4. Learned Single Judge has placed reliance on judgments of Kumari Deepti Vs. State of U.P. and others (Special Appeal Defective No. 109 of 2023, decided on 23.02.2023) and State of U.P. and others Vs. Rinki Yadav [2022 lawsuit (AII) 1900] and also the judgment of Full Bench of this Court rendered in Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and others [2017 AIR (Allahabad) 116]. The relevant extract from the judgment in Kumari Deepti (supra), which also takes note of the Full Bench judgment in Gaurav Sharma (supra), is as follows:
"32. Before parting with this case, we may observe that benefit of the reservation in public employment to different disadvantaged section of the society is permissible under the Constitution of India as an affirmative action. It is not in dispute that the Appellant-Petitioner was given appointment while she claimed the benefit of reservation available to O.B.C. candidates in her selection to the post of Constable (Civil Police) Uttar Pradesh Police Services, merely because the certificate produced by her was not in (Praroop-1) though the certificate produced by her, clearly evidences that she belongs to an O.B.C. category as identified by the State Government of Uttar Pradesh and also that she does not get excluded as a person belonging to creamy layer in terms of the criteria laid down by the State Government of Uttar Pradesh. For the said purpose, it should not be taken aid of by the State authorities for denying her otherwise constitutionally guaranteed right of affirmative action."
5. Learned Standing counsel appearing for the appellants does not dispute that the petitioner belongs to O.B.C. (N.C.L.) category. He submits that the only objection of the State was with regard to the format in which the caste certificate was submitted. He is not in a position to dispute that the said controversy stands covered by the law laid down by this Court in Kumari Deepti (supra), extract from which is quoted above.
6. In our opinion, it has rightly been held that granting benefit of reservation to a person falling under the socially disadvantaged class is a constitutional mandate and which has to be complied with. Once, it is not disputed that the petitioner is entitled to social reservation, as she belongs to the aforesaid category, her claim could not have been rejected on the ground that the certificate submitted by her, was not on prescribed format. Additionally, the respondents themselves allowed the petitioner to participate in the selection process on the basis of certificate knowing only that it was not in the prescribed format and therefore, at the belated stage, they could not have ousted her from the selection process on the aforesaid technical objection.
7. We, thus, find no legal infirmity in the view taken by learned Single Judge.
8. The appeal lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Donadi Ramesh, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)
Order Date :- 25.8.2023
Noman
