Sri Chandan Chauhan vs The Union Of India And Ors on 13 February, 2026

Author: Devashis Baruah

Bench: Devashis Baruah

                                                                     Page No.# 1/7

GAHC010018202026




                                                              undefined

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

                           Case No. : WP(C)/555/2026

         SRI CHANDAN CHAUHAN
         S/O- RAJESH CHAUHAN.
         R/O- VILL.- BOGORIGHAT NO.2, P.S.- KHERONI, DIST.- WEST KARBI
         ANGLONG, ASSAM.



         VERSUS

         THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI,
         INDIA.

         2:THE STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION
          REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY
          BLOCK-12
          CGO COMPLEX
          LODHI ROAD
          NEW DELHI.

         3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
          CRPF (RECRUITMENT BRANCH)
          EAST BLOCK-07
          LEVEL-4
          SCETOR -01
          R.K. PURAM
          NEW DELHI-110066.

         4:THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
          NORTH EAST ZONE
          CRPF
          9TH MILE
         AMERIGOG
                                                                Page No.# 2/7

           GUWAHATI
           DIST.- KAMRUP(M)
           ASSAM.

           5:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
            BORDER SECURITY FORCE
            BLOCK-10
            CGO COMPLEX
            LODHI ROAD
            NEW DELHI-110003.

           6:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
            BORDER SECURITY FORCE
            FRONTIER HEADQUARTERS
            PATGAON
            NEAR AZARA RAILWAY STATION
            GUWAHATI
            DIST.- KAMRUP(M)
           ASSAM
            PIN- 781017.

           7:THE PRESIDING OFFICER
            EXECUTIVE BOARD.
            DV/DME/RME-CT) (GD) EXAM-2025
            CENTRE - CAPFs COMPOSITE HOSPITAL
            PATGAON
            BORDER SECURITY FORCE
            GUWAHATI. DIST.- KAMRUP(M)
           ASSAM

           8:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
           WEST KARBI ANGLONG
            HAMREN
            DIST.- WEST KARBI ANGLONG
           ASSAM

For the Petitioner(s)   : Mr. R. Bora, Advocate

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. S. Roy, CGC
                      : Mr. J. Handique, Government Advocate
                                                                     Page No.# 3/7

                                   BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                                    ORDER

Date : 13.02.2026

Issue notice making it returnable on 12.03.2026 at 2 PM.

2. Mr. S. S. Roy, the learned CGC accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 and Mr. J. Handique, the learned Government Advocate accept notice on behalf of the Respondent No.8.

3. As the Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 are duly represented, extra copies of the writ petition be served upon them during the course of the day.

4. The case of the Petitioner herein is that the Petitioner belongs to the "Nonia" community which comes under the Other Backward Classes in the State of Assam. In that regard, a certificate was issued to the Petitioner on 06.05.2024 by the District Commissioner, West Karbi Anglong.

5. In pursuance to the Notice dated 05.09.2024 published by the Staff Selection Commission for recruitment of Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) and SSF, Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles, and Sepoy in Narcotics Control Bureau Examination, 2025, the Petitioner submitted his application under Other Backward Class category.

Page No.# 4/7

6. It is very pertinent to take note of that in terms with Clause 5 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024, the age limit for unreserved candidate ranges between 18 to 23 years. However, in respect to OBC candidates, there is relaxation by 3 (three) years. The Petitioner admittedly as on 01.01.2025 was 24 years 8 months and 28 days and unless the Petitioner does not come under the OBC category and claimed benefits, the Petitioner cannot be considered in view of Clause 5 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024.

7. This Court further takes note of that in terms with Clause 6.1 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024, the documents would be verified at a later stage and at that point of time, the candidates are required to produce the necessary documents upon which the candidate relies. In terms with Clause 6.5, it is the mandate that if a candidate wants to claim benefit under SC/ST/OBC/EWS category, the crucial date would be the closing date for receipt of the online application form i.e. 14.10.2024.

8. It is further seen as per Clause 6.6 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024 that the person seeking an appointment on the basis of reservation in the OBC must ensure that he possesses the caste/community certificate and does not fall in the creamy layer on the crucial date. Therefore, a combined reading of Clause 6.5 and Clause 6.6 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024 shows that the crucial date is 14.10.2024.

Page No.# 5/7

9. The Petitioner has assailed Clause 6.5 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024. The ground of assailing is that a notice dated 17.08.2017 issued by the Under Secretary (P&P-I) of the Government of India, Staff Selection Commission wherein it is mentioned that the Commission will not insist on candidates producing OBC Certificates issued within the cut off dates i.e. 3 years before the last date of receipt of the applications and up to 180 days after the closing date of the applications mentioned in the Notice. It is also mentioned that the candidature of OBC candidates will remain provisional subject to the verification of his/her claim by the User Department concerned as the Appointing Authority.

10. Mr. R. Bora, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that the Notice dated 05.09.2024 having been issued by the Staff Selection Commission, they are bound by the Notice dated 17.08.2017 and as such, Clause 6.5 as well as Clause 6.6 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024 cannot be given effect to.

11. Per contra, Mr. S. S. Roy, the learned CGC appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 submitted that the issue in the instant case is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sakshi Arha Vs. Rajasthan High Court and Others reported in (2025) SCC OnLine SC 757, wherein the Page No.# 6/7

Supreme Court had categorically observed that the last date on which the application is to be filed is the date on which the candidate should possess the OBC Creamy Layer Certificate. The learned CGC submitted that in the instant case, the Petitioner had obtained the certificate on 07.01.2025 and as such, the said certificate cannot be taken into consideration in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sakshi Arha (supra).

12. This Court has heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and has given anxious consideration to the respective submissions so made. For the purpose of issuing notice, a case has been made out on the aspect as to whether the Notice dated 17.08.2017 issued by the Staff Selection Commission still continues to hold the field. It is the prima facie opinion of this Court that the judgment delivered in the case of Sakshi Arha (supra) is in respect to those circulars issued by the Government of Rajasthan. This aspect is required to be clarified by way of filing an affidavit by the Respondents.

13. Accordingly, the affidavit be filed by the Respondents on or before 02.03.2026.

14. Liberty is given to the Petitioner to file reply by 10.03.2026.

15. This Court further duly takes note of the submission of Mr. Page No.# 7/7

R. Bora, the learned counsel that if no interim directions is passed, the instant writ petition would become infructuous inasmuch as, even if the adjudication as regards the legality and validity of Clause 6.5 of the Notice dated 05.09.2024 is adjudicated in favour of the Petitioner, no effective relief can be passed inasmuch as all the posts would be filled up.

16. Taking into account the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the Petitioner is entitled to certain interim directions.

17. Accordingly, till the next date, one post in the post of Constable (GD) in CAPFs shall be kept vacant.

18. List this matter on the returnable date for further consideration. It is the opinion of this Court that as an interim order is passed, the writ petition is required to be disposed off urgently as it would impact the ongoing recruitment process.

19. The parties are directed to bring on record their respective pleadings as directed above without fail.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant