Ramesh Prasad Das vs Punjab National Bank & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 5869 Cal

     11
29.11.2021
 Ct. No.23
     pg.
                        IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                       CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                                APPELLATE SIDE
                                 WPA 15895 of 2021
                                 Ramesh Prasad Das
                                         Vs.
                             Punjab National Bank & Ors.


                       Mr. Sunil Gupta
                       Mr. Dipanjan Biswas
                                  ... For the petitioner

                       Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mukherjee
                                  ... For the respondent no.1

Mr. Dipanjan Datta ... For the respondent no.5/IBPS

Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on

record.

The petitioner has retired from Indian Navy on 28th

February, 2021. On the date of his retirement, the

petitioner had served the Indian Navy for over 14 years.

The petitioner also belongs to the Scheduled Caste (in

short "SC") community. The petitioner applied in the

Common Requirement Process for recruitment of Clerks in

various banks under the Ex-Servicemen Category. In the

application form the petitioner had, however, mentioned to

belong to "ST" i.e., Scheduled Tribe instead of "SC". The

petitioner is born on 19th July, 1987 and, as such, as on

1st September, 2020, being the cut-off date, the petitioner

was 33 years and 43 days old. As per the advertisement,

the maximum age limit as on 1st September, 2020 for

being considered for the recruitment process in respect of

SC and ST was 33 years (28+5). In the category of Ex-

Servicemen, the maximum permissible age is 3 years plus

the actual period of service rendered in the Defence Force

subject to a maximum age limit of 50 years. The petitioner

being of over age was not entitled to participate in the

recruitment process either as a SC or as a ST candidate.

The petitioner, however, by virtue of rendering more than

14 years of service was entitled to an exemption of 17

years (14+3). The petitioner, therefor, had been considered

in Ex-Servicemen Category as in his case the cut-off age

with the relaxation would be 45 years (28+17) and it was

below 50 years and not 33 years as in the case of SC and

ST. The petitioner participated in the recruitment process

and obtained 39.50 marks out of total 200 marks which on

being calculated in 100 would come to 19.375. The

petitioner on having received the qualifying marks was

recommended for appointment in Punjab National Bank (in

short "PNB") and was directed to report at Punjab National

Bank, Circle Office, South 24-Parganas, on 1st July, 2021

with all his requisites including the caste certificate. The

petitioner was unable to show that he belonged to the ST

category but showed his SC certificate. This fact was taken

note of by PNB and informed the recruiting authority. The

petitioner says that the marks obtained by the petitioner

also qualifies him to be considered under the Ex-

Servicemen Category belonging to SC community for

appointment but the respondent authorities have not

taken note of such fact. The petitioner wanted to correct

the mistake in his form but the same was also not allowed.

The petitioner has approached this Court on 27th

September, 2021, inter alia, seeking a direction to allow

him to correct his form indicating therein SC as category

instead of ST.

Before the writ petition could be taken up for

hearing, the petitioner was served with a Cancellation of

Candidature as no change of category as per the

appointment notification is permitted after registration of

the online application. The petitioner has prepared a

supplementary affidavit affirmed on 29th November, 2021

annexing thereto a copy of the Cancellation notice dated

20th October, 2021. The said supplementary affidavit is

taken on record. Copies thereof be served on the

respondents, if not already served.

The petitioner says that a Division Bench of Delhi

High Court by a judgment and order dated 23rd December,

2016 passed in W.P. (C) 11642 of 2016 and CM No.45868

of 2016 (Ajay Kumar Mishra v. Union of India & Ors.) has

held that the candidature of the petitioner in that case

ought not to have been cancelled on the ground of an error

in typing his date-of-birth in the online application when

the difference was of only one day and that the petitioner

in the said case did not derive any benefit whatsoever by

reason of the difference.

In the instant case, the petitioner could not have

participated in the examination under SC or ST Category

being over 33 years of age. The petitioner was allowed to

participate in the examination which was not possible

unless he qualified under Ex-Servicemen Category. The

petitioner after having received 19.375 marks out of 100

has qualified under the Ex-Servicemen Category cannot

now be rejected only because he has stated ST instead of

SC unless he has derived benefit out of the same.

The facts of the instant case do not tally with the

facts before the Division Bench of Delhi High Court in Ajay

Kumar Mishra (supra). However, the analogy of no benefit

derived can be taken for consideration. Before the matter

could be further considered to allow the petitioner to be

appointed under Ex-Servicemen Category, this Court

needs to know whether the petitioner derived any benefit

as ST, how many vacancies were under the Ex-Servicemen

Category and whether all the posts earmarked for Ex-

Servicemen Category have been exhausted by appointing

the successful candidates. This Court also requires to

know whether any one has joined in the Ex-Servicemen

Category obtaining marks lower to that of the petitioner.

The matter is adjourned till 13th December, 2021 to

enable the advocates representing the respondents to

apprise this Court about the details as indicate

hereinabove.

It is made clear that if, as on date, any vacancy is

there under the Ex-Servicemen Category in PNB, then

filling up of any post in Ex-Servicemen in PNB by any

candidate obtaining lesser marks than the petitioner

subsequent to 20th October, 2021, i.e., after cancellation of

petitioner's candidature, shall abide by the result of

further orders to be passed in the instant writ petition.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)