Delhi High Court
Union Of India vs Anuragbachan Singh & Ors on 29 May, 2019
$~45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ Date of Decision: 29.05.2019
% W.P.(C.) No. 6043/2019
UNION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Suparna Srivastava and
Ms. Sanjna Dua, Advocates.
versus
ANURAGBACHAN SINGH & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate for
R-1.
Mr. Naresh Kaushik and Mr. Devik
Singh, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
VIPIN SANGHI, J. (ORAL)
Caveat No.579/2019
Counsel appears for the caveator/respondent. Caveat accordingly stands
discharged.
CM No.26094/2019
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C.) No. 6043/2019 & CM No.26095/2019
1. The petitioner has preferred the present petition to assail the order
dated 11.03.2019 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Principal
Bench in OA/100/4400/2018. The Tribunal has allowed the said Original
Application preferred by the respondent-applicant. The respondent had
preferred the said original application with his grievance that even though he
belonged to the OBC category/ „JAT‟ community, and he had secured the
overall rank of 673 in Civil Services Examination (CSE) conducted in the
year 2017, he had not been allocated to a service and another candidate-who
had secured the rank of 675 belonging to the OBC Category was allocated to
the Indian Revenue Service (IT). The reason given by the petitioner for not
selecting and allocating a service to the respondent as an OBC candidate,
was that the certificate that he produced, as issued by the Sub Divisional
Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan) described the respondent as
belonging to "JAT SIKH" Community.
2. The stand taken by the petitioner was that "JAT SIKH" is not one of
the class enlisted as a backward community in the central list for the State of
Rajasthan. On the other hand, the case of the respondent was that the caste
"JAT" is enlisted as a backward class, and merely because the certificate
described him as "JAT SIKH"- since he follows the Sikh religion, it would
not take away the fact that he belonged to the JAT Community, which is a
backward class.
3. To clarify the matter, the respondent produced yet another class
certificate issued by the SDM, Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan) dated 9.3.2017
which described his community as „JAT‟.
4. It is not in dispute that the "JAT Community" is enlisted as backward
class, and if the candidature of the respondent had been considered as falling
in the OBC category, he was meritorious enough to be allocated to the
service in the said CSE 2017. The Tribunal has allowed the original
application by placing reliance on the OM dated 6.11.2001 which is relevant
and pertinent to the issue, and the same reads as under:-
"1. I am directed to refer to your letter No.F11/25/2/R&P/SV/584
dated 16.10.2001 on the above subject and to say that JAT
Caste/Community has been included in the Central List of OBCs for
Rajasthan (except Bharatpur & Dhaulpur Districts) as per the Notification
No.12011/68/98-BCC dated 27.10.1999.
2. As regards inclusion of any Caste/Community in the Central Lists
of OBCs, there is no bar of religion and as such any caste/community
irrespective of its religion can be considered for inclusion in the Central
Lists of OBCs provided the community otherwise fulfill the criteria of
Social, Educational and Economic backwardness.
3. In view of the above, persons professing sikh religion belonging to
„Jat‟ community in the State of Rajasthan (except Bharatpur & Dhaulpur
Districts) are entitled to get Backward Class Certificate. However, before
issue of such certificate it may be ensured that the person concerned is a
permanent resident of that State. In case of migrant OBcs, we have
migrated from one state to another, the OBC certificate may be issued on the
production of a Certificate issued to his father by the prescribed authority of
the State of his father‟s origin after satisfying about the genuineness of the
certificate issued to his father by the State of his origin. A copy of the
guidelines issued in this regard by the Govt. of India is enclosed."
5. The Tribunal has also placed reliance on the decisions of the
Allahabad High Court in Baldev Singh Vs. Tahsildar and Others,
2000(4) AWC 2781 and the decision of the Uttrakhand High Court in
Dharam Singh Vs. State of Uttranchal through Chief Secretary and
Others in W.P(C) No. 917 (M/B) of 2003.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to place reliance
on a communication dated 1.6.2017 issued by the Deputy Secretary to
the Government of India addressed to the Joint Secretary UPSC, as
well as specific communication issued in relation to the respondent
dated 7.6.2018 addressed by the Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment to the Secretary Department of Personnel and Training
(DoPT), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,
wherein it is stated that „JAT SIKH‟-Community does not fall in the
Central List of OBC for the State of Rajasthan. Both these
communications do not specifically refer to or deal with the OM dated
6.11.2001 referred to by the Tribunal in the impugned order. They are
both contrary to the aforesaid OM and, therefore, are incorrect. They
also ignore the decisions of two High Courts relied upon by the
respondent. Thus, these communications, in our view, are of no avail.
5. The enlistment of the backward class for the purposes of grant
of reservation is religion neutral. That being the position, merely
because the respondent‟s religion i.e. Sikhism was mentioned in class
certificate issued to the respondent, it did not take way the fact that he
belonged to the "JAT Community" which is a reserved class.
Moreover the same authority, namely, the SDM, Sri Ganganagar
(Rajasthan) has issued the subsequent class certificate, which leaves
no manner of doubt that the respondent belongs to the "JAT
Community" which is a reserved class in the Central List for the State
of Rajasthan, and falls in the Central List of OBC.
6. Accordingly, we find no merit in the petition. Dismissed.
VIPIN SANGHI, J.
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.
MAY 29, 2019
ib/jitender
