Veena & Ors. vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi & ...
1998 Latest Caselaw 229 Del

ORDER

K. Ramamoorthy, J.

1. The writ petitioners who belong to places outside Delhi had applied pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (in short MCD) for the appointment of primary teachers in various schools. All the 21 petitioner belonging to the OBC category. They had produced certificates showing their caste or class as shown in Form-A to the counter affidavit filed by the MCD. It is stated by the petitioners that some of the petitioner had secured high marks and stand equal to the person belonging to the general category.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the MCD had refused to consider the case of the petitioners on the ground that the certificates produced by them showing the caste or class is not in accordance with Annexure-AA shown at page 15 to the counter affidavit filed by the MCD and that is not in accordance with law and, therefore, the MCD should be directed to consider the case of the petitioners in the light of the qualifications prescribed and on the basis of their attainment in the academic exaim. and also they being belonging to the backward class.

3. Ms. Madhu Tewatia, learned counsel for the MCD broadly indicated the approach made by the MCD in making the selection. As per the general instructions issued in the advertisement the candidates were required to mention in the envelope on top showing the following:

"The envelope containing the application should affix in bold letters on the tope "RECRUITMENT OF PRIMARY TEACHER(GENERAL/TAMIL/URDU/& NURSERY TEACHERS IN THE MCD, 1996". Category viz. Gen./SC/ST/OBC/PH/Exs etc. may also be indicated clearly on top of the envelop."

4. As per the details given in the Envelope the candidates were segregated and the selection process was made. With reference to the point about the cut of mark of grade fixed by the MCD for selection, the approach of the MCD whatever the nature of grade of the person belonging to the backward class they were kept in the same category and they are not taken to the general category whether the grade fixed was higher than the candidate belonging to the backward category. Therefore, the result was that the persons who had applied on the basis of the OBC certificates were not taken to the general category even though the grade was much above than what was fixed for OBC and the general category.

5. On two primary grounds, the petitioners would seek direction to the MCD for consideration of their case for the appointment of the primary school teacher. The first is that these OBC certificates produced by the petitioners have been ignored that they were not verified or they were not in form of AA found in page 15. The method adopted for assessing the candidates for selection is not in accordance with para E of the constitution and the decision of the Supreme Court where the principle had been laid down by the Supreme Court with reference to selection made to the educational institutional and also the University.

6. In the counter affidavit the MCD has stated broadly the point the case of the petitioners were not considered because the certificates were not in accordance with form-AA.

7. In the advertisement made as note it is stated:

Note: Candidates seeking reservation as ST/SC/OBC/Exs/OH may submit the prescribed certificate from the competent authority in support of their claim with applications. The reservation policy to the categories of SC/ST/OBC/Exs and physically Handicapped candidates shall be followed in accordance with the latest policy of Central Delhi Govt.

8. It is not stated in the advertisement that the form with reference to OBC should be in a particular format and should be obtained from the office in Delhi emanated by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi.

9. Ms. Madhu Tewatia, learned counsel for the MCD, submitted that Form A shown in Annexure-A in the note reference is made to Annexure-AA and, therefore, the petitioners must have been aware of the correct format which they could produce the certificate, when in the advertisement the MCD had not chosen to mention and tell the candidates the correct format in which they should apply.

10. On a consideration of the materials produced before me I am coming to the conclusion that the MCD had not kept in mind the constitutional mandate and the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court with reference to selection of candidates. As regards the production of OBC certificate from the office in Delhi, there is absolutely no difficulty because no law can impose an obligation on the citizen of India which cannot be fulfillled. The petitioners who are from outside of Delhi cannot obtain certificates from the office of Delhi and office of the Delhi also would not in a position to ascertain the statement made by the candidates before him and there is no sources from which the office in Delhi could verify the statement made in the application. If the certificates produced by the petitioners are not correct, the MCD could check up from the office of issuing authority and action should be taken if the certificates produced by the petitioners are not factually correct that is a different issue. The method adopted by the MCD in considering the case of the petitioners is quite contrary to the law and cannot be sustained in law. The case of the petitioners, who are in 21 in numbers, should be considered by the MCD afresh without pressing for the certificate from the Delhi office and the MCD could also consider the cut of marks grade suitably and accommodate those petitioners who come above those of general grade and OBC and could certain grade fixed for the general category and the such who come within this should be put in general category. The appointments made by the MCD prior to and after filing the writ petition shall remain undisturbed. The situation has been brought out by the MCD by not following law. the MCD is bound to consider the case of the petitioners and then suitably accommodate the petitioners if they are otherwise fit for appointment without pressing for certificates of OBC from Delhi State the MCD should consider the case of the 21 petitioners and issue appropriate order on or before 30.04.1998.

11. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed in the above terms.