Gyanti Chauhan @ Gyanti Kumari ... vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1342 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/8

GAHC010245012017




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/7870/2017

         GYANTI CHAUHAN @ GYANTI KUMARI CHAUHAN
         D/O SRI PRARASH NATH CHAUHAN R/O VILL- BOGORIGHAT P.O. and P.S.
         KHERONI DIST. WEST KARBI ANGLONG HAMREN, PIN - 782440.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM and 3 ORS
         REP. BY THE COMMISSIOER and SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT,
         DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006

         2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

          ASSAM
          ULUBARI
          GUWAHATI- 781007.

         3:THE STATE LEVEL POLICE RECRUITMENT BOARD

          REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
          and ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE TAP
          ASSAM
          ULUBARI
          GUWAHATI - 781007.

         4:SRI AJEET CHAUHAN
          C/O SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
          HAMREN
         WEST KARBI ANGLONG
          P.O. and P.S. HAMREN DIST. WEST KARBI ANGLONG
         ASSAM
          PIN - 782486
                                                                                   Page No.# 2/8

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR.S CHAUHAN

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

07.04.2021

Heard Mr. S. Chouhan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D. Nath, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State respondent nos. 1 to 3. None appears on call for the private respondent no.4.

2) With consent of the learned counsel appearing for both sides, the matter was heard at the 'admission' stage.

3) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the recommendation of the private respondent to fill up the post of Constable in District Executive Force (hereinafter referred to as 'DEF' for short) and to direct the respondent authorities to recommend the name of the petitioner for being appointed to the post of Constable in DEF.

4) The petitioner belongs to More Other Backward Class category (MOBC for short). The petitioner is a residents of District Karbi Anglong and she had passed out Higher Secondary in Arts stream [HS (Arts) for short]. In the month of December, 2015, an advertisement was published for filling up 2564 posts of DEF/SB/APRO/Fire & Emergency Service/SDRF and Delhi Police and that 30% of posts of DEF/SB/APRO category was reserved for female candidates. It is projected that 25 posts were allotted to Hamren as per population ratio of 2011 census, for which the requisite qualification was that the candidate should be Page No.# 3/8

H.S. passed and that 10% posts were reserved for ST(P), 5% for ST(H), SC 7% and 27% for OBC/MOBC category. The advertisement prescribed that the age of the applicants should be between 18 to 25 years. The Physical Efficiency Test (hereinafter referred to as 'PET' for short) was for 40 marks and 10 marks was allotted for extra-curricular activities and special skills like NCC, Home Guard and Sports. The petitioner had participated in the selection

process and had secured 4th position amongst 6 (six) female candidates with 10.95 marks in running and 10.64 marks in long jump, i.e. total 21.59 marks in PET. Thereafter, the petitioner had appeared in written examination. In this writ petition, it is projected that while names of 20 male candidates were recommended for appointment, the names of only 3 female candidates were recommended. It is also projected that reservation for women was 30% and, as such, the reservation policy for women was violated in this recruitment process.

5) The learned counsel for the petitioners had submitted that total 105 candidates including 6 female candidates were selected in Hamren. It is stated that the petitioner belongs to MOBC category and registered with Assistant Employment Officer, Hamren as educated unemployed person. It is also submitted that the said petitioner had participated in Kabaddi event held in the year 2011 in Kapili Junior College and stood runners- up and was awarded with a certificate.

6) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that 25 posts of DEF/SB/APRO were to be filled up from reserved category candidates of Karbi Anglong (Hamren Division), now West Karbi Anglong. It is also submitted that 30% posts ought to be filled up by female candidate and 70% posts were to be filled up by male candidates. It is submitted that 70% out of 15 posts i.e. 10 (ten) posts were to be filled up by male candidates and accordingly, 5 (five) numbers of post was required to be filled up by female candidates. However, the respondent authorities had recommended 12 male and 3 female candidates, as such, the reservation policy for women had been violated. Therefore, it is submitted that the private respondents are required to give way for appointing the two petitioners. It is further submitted that out of 15 posts, names of 12 male candidates Page No.# 4/8

including 3 SC male candidates was forwarded, however, name of only 2 male candidates could have been forwarded. It is also submitted that while considering appointment, the cadre strength was not considered by the respondent authorities, for which discrepancy had set in. Accordingly, it is submitted that the recommendation of the name of respondent no. 4 was illegal accordingly, it is prayed that the respondent authorities be directed to appoint the petitioner in the post of Constable in DEF. To support of his submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the case of (i) Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission & Ors., AIR 2007 SC 3127: (2007) 8 SCC 785 , and (ii) The State of Assam & Ors. Vs. Smt. Kakumoni Borah & Ors., W.A. 85/2019 decided on 06.02.2020 .

7) The learned State counsel had extensively referred to the affidavit- in- opposition filed by the respondent no.3 and it was submitted that the petitioner was not entitled to be awarded with any mark for participating in College Level Sports as it does not meet the criteria laid down in the advertisement dated 10.12.2015 as such meet was not a National State Level Sports Event recognized by Indian Olympics Association.

8) It is submitted that out of combined recruitment for 2564 posts of Constable in DEF, SB, DP, APRO, FES, and SDRF, service wise allotment of 25 posts for Hamren was as follows, viz., (1) DEF/SB/DP - 15 posts, (2) APRO - 8 posts, (3) F&ES and SDRF -2 posts. It is also submitted that the marks secured by the last candidate in various categories was as follows, viz., (1) male of unreserved category - 56.06; (2) female of unreserved category - 42.88; (3) male of OBC/ MOBC category - 54.21; (4) female of OBC/MOBC category - 42.13; (5) male of SC category - 53.24; (6) male of ST(P) category - 55.56; (7) male of ST(H) category - 54.90. As regards to the issue of reservation of women, it is submitted that the category wise distribution of 15 posts of DEF, SB and DP, and number of candidates selected maintaining reservation policy for different categories and 30% horizontal reservation for women were as under:-

Category      wise Posts                       Posts   filled
total posts                                    up
                                                                                   Page No.# 5/8

                   Allotted

                   Male         Female        Male          Female
















9)               It is further submitted that in the post of Constable in APRO, while filling up

the posts, reservation policy was followed. However, in the absence of candidate with qualification of H.S. (Science) with "Physics, Chemistry & Mathematics" (PCM), the two posts for female (unreserved) was filled up by male candidate as per the provisions of Sub Rule (4) of Rule 3 of the Assam Women (Reservation of Vacancies in Services & Posts) Rules, 2005. It is further submitted that 2 (two) posts of constable meant for F&ES and SDRF were for male candidates having passed H.S. (Science) were filled up by candidates of Hamren District and moreover, it is submitted that as the petitioner was from H.S.(Arts) stream, she was eligible for selection against the post of constable of APRO, F&ES and SDRF. It is also submitted that 30% reservation for female is horizontal and that the posts meant for female was as follows, viz., unreserved - 2, and OBC/MOBC- 1 and accordingly, as per merit, two top female candidates were selected against unreserved category and third female candidate was selected from OBC category. By referring to the mark sheet of the petitioner of H.S. (Arts) Final Examination, 2013 (Annexure-C of Affidavit- in- opposition), it is submitted that the petitioner had secured 35.6% and accordingly, as per the advertisement dated 10.12.2015, the petitioner was not allotted any marks under educational qualification, as it was provided Page No.# 6/8

that the candidates securing between 40% to 59.99% would have got 2 marks. It is also submitted that in their affidavit- in- opposition, the respondent no.3 had disclosed marks obtained by all selected candidates. It is submitted that it was incorrectly stated in the writ petition that 5(five) male candidates were selected against OBC/ MOBC category and that the respondent no.4 was selected against male OBC/ MOBC category for APRO since respondent no.4 has passed H.S. in Science stream with PCM as combined subjects. Hence, it is submitted that the writ petition was misconceived and based on erroneous presumption by the petitioner and, as such, it is submitted that this writ petition be dismissed.

10) The submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and State respondent nos. 1 to 3, as well as pleadings and documents contained in the writ petition, affidavit- in- opposition and affidavit- in- reply have received consideration of the Court.

11) As per the chart given in para-8 above, it appears that the category wise distribution of 15 posts of constable in DEF, SB and DP were as follows, viz., (1) unreserved - 8 post, (2) OBC/MOBC - 4 post, (3) SC - 1 post, (4) ST(P) - 1 post, (5) ST(H) - 1. It is seen that as per Schedule appended to the Assam Women (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Rules 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "2005 Rules") provides for break-up of percentage of 30% reservation for women candidates. The said Schedule is quoted below:-

Sl. No.   Category              Existing percentage   Reserved for Women
                                                      (number of posts).











                                                                                   Page No.# 7/8




12)              Therefore, in the present case as in respect of vacancies in respect of

category of SC, ST(P) and ST(H) was 1 (one) each, if such vacancy is kept reserved for women, not only such reservation would not be contrary to the Schedule appended to the 2005 Rules, but it would make 100% posts reserved for women. The provisions of the said 2005 Rules along with the Schedule appended thereto make it clear that it is not permissible to club all the vacant posts advertised and reserve 30% thereof for women, as such, the Court finds no merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that out of 15 posts of constable of DEF/SB/APRO, 5 posts was to be filled up by female candidates, which is not in accordance with the said 2005 Rules. Rather, the learned State counsel has been able to demonstrate that in the present case in hand, there was no violation of the provisions of the said 2005 Rules. The petitioner was able to secure 37.59 marks for the post of DEF whereas the respondent no. 4, who belonged to OBC/ MOBC category was selected against APRO.

13) As per the final recommended list (Annexure-F of affidavit- in- opposition), the marks obtained by the selected candidates are as follows, viz., (A) Unreserved category (irrespective of caste) - (1) Ashok Kumar Chauhan, OBC - 61.95 marks; (2) Jogeswar Das, SC - 58.02; (3) Horbojoy Sengyung, ST(H) - 57.01; (4) Budhan Nath, OBC - 56.77; (5) Ajay Kumar, SC - 56.56; (6) Pator Phangcho, ST(H) - 56.06. (B) OBC/MOBC category - (1) Jitendra Chauhan, OBC - 55.86; (2) Parmananda Nath, OBC - 54.24; (3) Bikash Chauhan, OBC - 54.21. (C) SC Category - (1) Bibek Das, SC (respondent no.5) - 53.24. (D) ST(P) Category - (1) Pinku Basumatary, ST(P) - 55.56. (E) ST(H) Category - Parish Hanse, ST(H) - 54.90. (E) Unreserved female candidate (irrespective of caste) - (1) Lalmati Yadav, OBC - 44.19; (2) Anjani Hojai, ST(H) - 42.88. (F) OBC/MOBC Category (Female) - (1) Ritu Chauhan

-- 42.13.

14) In view of above, the facts of the present case being distinguishable from the Page No.# 8/8

facts in which the two cited cases were decided, the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria (supra) and Smt. Kakumoni Borah & Ors. (supra), do not help the petitioner in any manner.

15) Therefore, as the petitioner has secured less than the selected candidate, and as the petitioner has not been able to establish that the reservation policy of the State was violated in the present selection process, not only the challenge to the selection and appointment of the respondent no. 4 fails, but the petitioner is found not entitled to any relief.

16) In view of the discussions above, this writ petition stands dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own cost.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant