Parganas & Anr vs Tapas Singh & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 3769 Cal

5
Court
No. 11    09.06.2023
G.S.Das
                                             FMA 860 of 2022
                                                  With
                                                   CAN 1 of 2022

                            The District Primary School Council North 24
                                            Parganas & Anr.
                                                 -Vs-
                                          Tapas Singh & Ors.


                       Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya
                       Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharyya            ... for the Appellants


                       Mr. Manoj Kumar Roy
                                                   ... for the Respondent No.1

Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay Ms. Sayantanee Bhattacharjee ... for the State-respondents

Party/Parties is/are represented in the order of

their name/names as printed above in the cause title.

The short question which has arisen for

consideration in this appeal arises out of the delayed

submission of Scheduled Tribe (ST) Certificate by the

writ petitioner/the respondent no.1 to this appeal

while appearing for selection as a Primary Teacher in

2009 under the District Primary School Council

(DPSC), North 24 Parganas.

Mr. Vaisya, Learned Senior Counsel appearing

for the appellant/DPSC with Mr. Bhattacharyya,

Learned Counsel, points out that the Hon'ble Single

Bench failed to appreciate that the last date for

submission of the ST certificate by the writ petitioner

as specified by the recruitment notice for 2009 was the

12th of June, 2010.

Since admittedly the writ petitioner obtained his

Certificate on the 25th August, 2011, i.e. after the last

cut off date, his application to be treated as a ST

candidate could not be processed.

Per contra, Mr. Roy, Learned Counsel appearing

for the writ petitioner/the respondent no.1, submits

that the Hon'ble Single Bench has taken note of the

fact that the writ petitioner/the respondent no.1 had

applied for ST Certificate on the 2nd of December,

2009, i.e. prior to the cut off date. It is not the fault of

the writ petitioner that the writ petitioner obtained the

ST Certificate ultimately from the concerned State

Authority on the 25th August, 2011.

However, both the written examination and the

interview to the present selection were delayed and

held subsequently pursuant to the intervention by the

Hon'ble High Court. At the subsequent selection stage,

the writ petitioner was issued a fresh Admit Card

where his ST status was clearly mentioned. It is

submitted that the writ petitioner also carried his ST

Certificate at the time of scrutiny during written test

and interview.

Mr. Roy, Learned Counsel, heavily relies on the

authority of the Hon'ble Apex Court as reported in

[(2016) 4 SCC 754, (In Re.: Ram Kumar Gijroya -vs-

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr.)] .

Mr. Roy submits that the decision of the Hon'ble Apex

Court is clearly binding on the point that once a candidate

belongs to the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or Other

Backward Classes, such status of the candidate does not

change from the birth and, in the spirit of the reservation

process envisioned by the Constitution and interpreted by

the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court qua reserved

category candidates who have otherwise been declared

successful in their respective categories, should be followed

as a constitutional goal.

This Court notices that in Ram Kumar Gijroya

(supra) the OBC certificate was submitted by the

candidate subsequently. In the light of the principles

as laid down in Ram Kumar Gijroya (supra), the OBC

Certificate, although subsequently submitted, was

allowed to be acted upon by the recruiting authority.

This Court is also taken to the decision

impugned of the Hon'ble Single Bench dated 31 st

March, 2022, which takes judicial notice of Ram

Kumar Gijroya (supra).

Having heard the parties and considering the

materials placed, this Court finds no reason to

interfere with the Judgment and Order of the Hon'ble

Single Bench having regard to the principles

enunciated in Ram Kumar Gijroya (supra).

Accordingly, FMA 860 of 2022 along with CAN

1 of 2022 stand dismissed.

All parties to act on a server copy of this order

duly obtained from the official website of the Hon'ble

High Court, Calcutta.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be supplied to the parties, subject to

compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Supratim Bhattacharya, J.) (Subrata Talukdar,J.)