Gaurav Swarnkar vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4085 Chatt

                                           1

                                                                                  NAFR
                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                           WPS No. 4316 of 2022

    Gaurav Swarnkar S/o Madanlal Swarnkar Aged About 33 Years Occ
     Unemployed , R/o Qr No 50/g, Risali Sector , Bhilai Nagar Civic Center, District
     Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

                                                                          ---- Petitioner

                                        Versus

   1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, The Department of School
      Education , Mantralaya , Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District
      Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

   2. The Collector District Bilaspur , Chhattisgarh.

   3. Divisional Joint Director Of Education Department Bilaspur Office At Bilaspur
      Chhattisgarh.

   4. District Education Officer Bilaspur, Office Near Old Composit Building , Nehru
      Nagar Bilaspur.

   5. Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board , Raipur Through Its Chair
      Person Office At Vyapam Bhavan, North Block , Sector 19, Nava Raipur
      Chhattisgarh.

                                                                       ---Respondents

For Petitioner             :     Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate
For State                  :     Mr. Amrito Das, Additional A.G.
For Respondents            :     Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

Order on Board

28.06.2022

Heard on petition.

1. It is submitted that the petitioner has applied for the post of Teacher (Physical Education) for which vacancy has been advertised by the respondent department. The name of the petitioner has been included in the select list. At the stage of document verification, the petitioner submitted his cast certificate of OBC category, which was not accepted and the petitioner was disqualified for the process of selection for the reason that the date on it was subsequent to the date of advertisement. The petitioner had applied for cast certificate prior to the filing application for the appointment. However it was because of the

delay on part of the competent authority, the certificate has been issued on a later date, for which petitioner can not be held responsible. The petitioner is a member of OBC since his birth and it is only the certification, which is being taken into consideration by the respondents. Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Charles K. Skaria & Others versus Dr. C. Mathew & Others (1980) 2 SCC 752 and on the judgment Dolly Chanda Vs. Chairman JEE (2005) 9 SCC 779, it is submitted that appropriate direction be issued.

2. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions and submits that according to advertisement itself all the certificates were required ante dated on the date the application was to be filed in the recruitment process. However, if the petitioner makes a representation, the same shall be considered by the respondents. Counsel for respondent No. 5 have formal objection.

3. After considering on these submissions, the petition is disposed off. The petitioner is granted liberty to file a representation within a time limit of 10 days, before respondents No. 3 who shall inturn consider on the same and take decision at the earliest, within a further time limit of 21 days from the date the copy of this order is received along-with the representation by taking cognizance of judgments Charles K. Skaria & Others versus Dr. C. Mathew & Others (supra) and Dolly Chanda Vs.Chairman JEE (supra). This Court has not made any observation on the merits of this case in this order until then the requirement procedure shall not be finalized.

4. With these observations this petition is disposed off.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

vaishali