Jharkhand High Court
Naodeepika Ekka vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 22 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S). No. 869 of 2023
----------
Naodeepika Ekka .......... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Personnel,
Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Govt. of
Jharkhand, Ranchi.
2. The Jharkhand Public Service Commission represented through its
Secretary, Ranchi.
3. The Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Public Service
Commission, Ranchi
.......... Respondents.
----------
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK
-----------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, Sr. Advocate
Mr. L.V.N. Shahdeo, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Pinky Tiwary, AC to AG
For the JPSC : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate
Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate
----------
05/ 22.08.2023 Heard the parties.
Prayers made
2. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the
note given in the Final Remarks Statement (Annexure-9) issued in favour of
the petitioner in which it has been made a final remarks that the candidature
of the petitioner has been rejected in view of Clause 7(i) of Advertisement
citing reason that she has submitted the residential certificate instead of
caste certificate.
Petitioner has further prayed for direction upon the respondent-
Jharkhand Public Service Commission (for short "JPSC") to consider the
caste certificate of petitioner and issue offer of appointment as she has
obtained 574 marks, which is more than the last selected candidate under
S.T. Category in the Combined Civil Services Examination, 2021.
Factual Matrix
3. The respondent-JPSC has issued advertisement no. 01/2021 for
Jharkhand Combined Civil Services Examination, 2021. The petitioner
being eligible in all respect had applied for appearing in the recruitment
process under S.T. category. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in the
preliminary test in which he was declared successful and became entitled to
appear in the mains examination. Thereafter, the respondent-JPSC invited
applications for combined civil services (mains) examination from the
candidates who have passed the Preliminary Examination, pursuant to
which, the petitioner filled-up the form for mains examination under S.T.
category. Subsequently, the petitioner appeared in the mains examination in
which she was declared successful. Thereafter, the respondent-JPSC has
uploaded interview e-call letter for combined civil services examination,
2021 and by way of said letter, it has been informed to the petitioner that
she has been shortlisted for document verification and interview and
directed the petitioner to appear for document verification which was
scheduled on 11.05.2022 and 12.05.2022. As per the instruction of the
respondent-JPSC, the petitioner appeared on 11.05.2022 where, for the first
time, she came to know that she has uploaded residential certificates instead
of caste certificate. On that information, the petitioner immediately on the
very same day, submitted the valid caste certificate issued by the Circle
Officer, Dumri Block, Gumla in prescribed format issued on 18.10.2019
and the respondent-authority has kept the same on record. On the very next
day i.e. on 12.05.2022, the petitioner also submitted a request letter to the
respondent-JPSC to consider her candidature taking into consideration the
caste certificate enclosed with the said request letter. Thereafter, the
petitioner was allowed to appear in the interview conducted by the
respondent-JPSC on 12.05.2022, in which she participated and at no point
of time, any objection was raised by the respondents regarding the
candidature of the petitioner. However, on 01.06.2022, when final result
was published by the respondent-JPSC, the name of the petitioner did not
figure in the final merit list. It is the specific case of the petitioner that
despite the fact she has obtained 574 marks which is more than the marks
obtained by last selected candidate under S.T. category (555 marks), she
was not selected and her candidature was rejected solely on the ground that
while filling-up the application form for Preliminary Examination, she had
not uploaded her caste certificate in the column provided for the purpose
rather inadvertently, she uploaded her residential certificate.
Hence, the petitioner has been constrained to knock the door of this
Court.
Submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner
4. Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. L.V.N.
Shahdeo, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously urges that
the action of the respondents is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
Learned senior counsel further argues that the caste certificate which has
been issued by the competent authority in prescribed format cannot be
rejected only on hyper technical grounds and the petitioner who appeared in
the Combined Civil Services Examination, 2021 cleared examination at all
the stages, i.e. P.T., Mains and Interview and obtained more marks than the
last selected candidate under her category. Learned senior counsel has
further submitted that the caste certificate produced by the petitioner was
much prior to publication of final result, hence, she is entitled for
consideration of her candidature. Learned senior counsel further argues that
the conduct of the respondent-authorities is contrary to the settled
proposition of law and guidelines issued on the subject of reservation and
concession for candidate belonging to reserved category. Learned senior
counsel further argues that the respondents cannot be permitted to once
allow the petitioner to appear in the different level of recruitment process as
a reserved category candidate and thereafter reject her candidature only on
the ground that the petitioner has not uploaded her caste certificate correctly
in the online application form.
5. Learned senior counsel referring to different provisions and clauses
of the advertisements submits that discrepancy was not as such, it would
debar the petitioner from appointment as she has qualified and obtained
more marks than the last selected candidate in her category. The
discrepancy pointed-out by the respondent-JPSC can be overlooked and
condoned. Learned senior counsel further argues that Clause-7(b) of the
Advertisement is mandatory and original caste certificate was to be
submitted at the time of interview. It has further been argued that since the
caste certificate or the residential certificate was not disputed at any point of
time and the same was verified and found to be genuine, the candidature of
the petitioner cannot be rejected merely on hyper technical ground. Learned
senior counsel to buttress his arguments, places heavy reliance on the
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya Vs.
D.S.S.S.B & Anr., reported in (2016) 4 SCC 754.
Submissions of learned counsel for the Respondents
6. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed. Learned counsel for the
respondent-State as well as JPSC vehemently opposes the contention of
learned senior counsel for the petitioner and submits that, from perusal of
the advertisement, it would be evident that for extending the benefits of
reservation, candidates belonging to ST/SC/OBC category were required to
produce caste certificate in Proforma-IV, which is part of the
Advertisement. Further, from perusal of press communique dated
13.11.2021 (Annexure-D to the counter-affidavit), it is apparent that the
candidates who were declared successful in the P.T., they were required to
fill-up the online application form again for the mains examination and they
were also required to mention the caste certificate number and date along
with the name of the issuance authority and same was to be uploaded along
with online application form. Learned counsel further argues that in the
mark-sheet, reasons for not extending the benefits of reservation to the
petitioner has also been mentioned that "candidate got benefits of ST
category in PT and Mains Examination, while residential certificate
uploaded instead of caste certificate". Learned counsel further argues that
petitioner failed to upload caste certificate in terms of the Advertisement,
Press Communique and Examination Rules, 2021 and as such, benefits of
reservation has not been extended to the petitioner. Learned counsel further
argues that from perusal of the material on record it is evident that reserved
categories candidates, who were declared successful in the PT Examination
were required to mention the details about the caste certificate in the
application form of the mains examination for claiming the benefits of
reservation and same were also required to be uploaded along with
application form of the mains examination. However, the petitioner while
filling-up the online application form for the mains examination has
uploaded the residential certificate in place of caste certificate which she
has also admitted vide Annexure-8 of the writ application and as such,
benefits of reservation has not been extended to her in terms of
Advertisement, Press Communique and Examination Rules and her
candidature has been rejected on that ground following the settled principle
of law that selection process has to be conducted strictly in terms of the
Advertisement.
7. It has been further argued that terms and conditions of the
advertisement is binding on each and every candidate. The category of a
candidate cannot be ground for relaxation of the terms and conditions.
Learned counsel submits that ratio laid down in case of Ram Kumar
Gijroya Vs. D.S.S.S.B & Anr. (supra) is not attracted in the instant case
rather, para-24 of Raj Kumar Mahto's case [(2020) 1 JBCJ 465 (HC)] is
fully applicable in the case of the petitioner. Learned counsel further argues
that last date for submission of certificate was 21.03.2021 by online mode.
What has been mentioned in the online application the same has to be
considered by the respondent-JPSC and if any discrepancy/ alteration is
found, the candidate is held responsible and the candidature of such
candidate is likely to be cancelled as per the terms and conditions of the
advertisement. In this regard, reference was made to Clause-7 of the
advertisement. Learned counsel placing heavy reliance on the judgment
passed by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in case of Prem Chand
Kumar Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors. (LPA No. 469 of 2015) which
was affirmed upto Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (C) No. 33684 of 2018. It
has been further argued by Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel
representing the respondent-JPSC that even Press Communique was issued
which has been accepted by the petitioner too. Learned counsel submits that
wrong uploading will be an effective ground for debarring the candidature
of a candidate. Reference is made to LPA 91 of 2020 (Dr. Sweta Kumari
@ Sweta Kumari Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors.).
8. Learned counsel accordingly submits that in view of the aforesaid
facts and circumstances, the instant writ application is not maintainable in
the eyes of law and thus, the same is fit to be dismissed.
Reply of petitioner to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for
the respondents
9. Replying to the contentions of learned counsel for the respondent-
JPSC, it has been argued by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that
Press Communique was issued after filling-up of the application form and
that too after the PT exam was over under the pen and signature of the
Examination Controller, who cannot be said to be Jharkhand Public Service
Commission. The reliance of the respondents on the judgments mentioned
above is not at all applicable in the case of petitioner. It has been further
argued that rules of game cannot be changed after the game is over. The
law is well settled and doctrine of estoppel will apply in the instant case.
Findings of the Court
10. Having heard the parties across the bar and upon perusal of the
documents brought on record, this Court is of the considered view that no
interference is warranted in the instant case.
11. Before delving deep into the matter, it would be apposite to examine
the relevant rules and clause of the Jharkhand Combined Civil Services
Examination Rules as well as different clauses of the advertisement.
12. It is not in dispute that after framing of the Jharkhand Combined
Civil Services Examination Rules, requisitions were sent in terms of
Appointment Rules, 2021 to the Jharkhand Public Service Commission for
initiation of selection process and thereafter, Advertisement No. 1/2021 was
published inviting applications against the advertised posts. Clause-7, 14
and 22 of the Advertisement needs to be discussed for proper adjudication
of the case. The same are quoted herein below:
Clause 7. vkj{k.k dk YkkHk %&
(a) vkj{k.k dk ykHk dsoy >kj[k.M jkT; ds LFkk;h
fuoklh dks ¼jkT; ljdkj ds i=kad&1754 fnukad&25-02-2019
ds vuqlkj½ >kj[k.M jkT; ds l{ke izkf/kdkj ;Fkk ftyk
naMkf/kdkjh@vij naMkf/kdkjh@mik;qDr@vij mik;qDr@vij
lekgÙkkZ@izFke Js.kh naMkf/kdkjh@ vuqeaMy
naMkf/kdkjh@dk;Zikyd naMkf/kdkjh@lgk;d lekgÙkkZ ,o
algk;d naMkf/kdkjh@vapy vf/kdkjh esa ls fdlh ,d
inkf/kdkjh }kjk fuxZr tkfr izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij gh ns;
gksxkA
(b) tkfr izek.ki= dh ewy izfr vUrohZ{kk ds le; lR;kiu
izfdz;k ds nkSjku izLrqr djuk vfuok;Z gksxk vU;Fkk vkj{k.k dk
ykHk ns; ugha gksxkA
(c) tkfr izek.ki= gsrq foLr`r funs'k fuEuor~ gS %&
(i) vuq lwfpr tutkfr@vuq lwfpr tkfr %&
>kj[k.M jkT; ds vu qlwfpr tutkfr ,oa vu qlfw pr tkfr ds
mEehnokjksa dks vkj{k.k dk ykHk dkfeZd] iz'kklfud
lq/kkj rFkk jktHkk"kk foHkkx] >kj[k.M ds ifji= la[;k&
1754 fnukad&25-02-2019 }kjk fu/kkZfjr fofgr izi=-IV
esa >kj[k.M jkT; ds l{ke izkf/kdkj }kjk fuxZr tkfr
izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij gh ns; gksxkA lacfa /kr ifji=
,oa fofgr izi= vk;ksx ds osclkbZV www.jpsc.gov.in
ij miyC/k gSA
(ii) vR;ar fiNM+k oxZ-I ,oa fiNM+k oxZ-II :-
>kj[k.M jkT; ds vR;ar fiNM+k oxZ-I ,oa fiNM+k oxZ-II
dksfV ds mEehnokjksa dks vkj{k.k dk ykHk dkfeZd]
iz"kklfud lq/kkj rFkk jktHkk"kk foHkkx] >kj[k.M ds
ifji= la[;k&1754 fnukad&25-02-2019 }kjk fu/kkZfjr
fofgr izi=-VI ds lkFk izi=-XI ¼dzheh ys;j jfgr½ esa
>kj[k.M jkT; ds l{ke izkf/kdkj }kjk fuxZr tkfr
izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij gh ns; gksxkA lacfa /kr ifji=
,oa fofgr izi= vk;ksx ds osclkbZV www.jpsc.gov.in
ij miyC/k gSA
(iii) vkfFkZd :i ls detksj oxZ ds fy, %&
dkfeZd] iz"kklfud lq/kkj rFkk jktHkk"kk foHkkx }kjk
>kj[k.M ljdkj dh flfoy lsokvksa ,oa inksa ij lh/kh
fu;qfDr;ksa esa vkfFkZd :Ik ls detksj oxZ ds fy, ns;
vkj{k.k gsrq fuxZr ladYi la[;k&1433 fnukad&15-02-
2019 ds vkyksd esa fofgr izi= ¼ifjf'k'V-I½ esa >kj[k.M
jkT; ds l{ke izkf/kdkj }kjk fuxZr izek.k i= ds vk/kkj
ij gh ns; gksxkA lacaf/kr ladYi ,oa fofgr izi= vk;ksx
ds osclkbZV www.jpsc.gov.in ij miyC/k gSA
Clause 14- The decision of the Commission as
to the eligibility or otherwise of a
candidate for admission to the
examination shall be final. The candidates
applying for the examination should
ensure that they fulfill all the eligibility
conditions for admission to the
examination. Their admission at all the
stages of examination for which they are
issued Admit Cards by the Commission
Viz. Preliminary Examination, Main
(written) Examination and interview Test
will be purely provisional, subject to their
satisfying the prescribed eligibility
condition. If on verification at any time
before or after the Preliminary
Examination, main (Written) Examination
or Interview Test, it is found that they do
not fulfill any of the eligibility conditions,
their candidature for the examination will
be cancelled by the Commission.
Clause 22.(ग). आवेदक यह सुनिनित करेंगे की सभी वाांनित प्रमाण पत्र
उिके पास आवेदि भरिे हेतु नवज्ञापि में निर्ााररत अांनतम नतनि
के बाद का िहीं होिा चानहएA
Clause 22.(ञ). Online Application में अभ्यिी द्वारा दी गई
सूचिा के आर्ार पर उिकी अभ्यर्िाता सुनिनित की
जाएगी। अभ्यिी Online Application भली-भााँनत
नवज्ञापि में निनहत प्रावर्ाि एवां निदेश के अिुसार ही
भरे। एक बार Online Application में की गई प्रनवनि
(Entry) के उपरान्त उसे अांनतम रूप से Submit करिे
के पिात् ककसी भी तरह के पररवताि का अिुरोर् स्वीकाया
िहीं होगा।
Clause 22.(द).आवेदि भरते समय आवेदक शैक्षनणक योग्यता से
सांबांनर्त नववरण उम्र सांबांर्ी प्रवेनशका (मैरिक) प्रमाण पत्र, मेनिकल
बोिा द्वारा निगात कदव्ाांगता प्रमाण पत्र, जानत प्रमाण पत्र, भूतपूवा
सैनिक प्रमाण पत्र, खेल्कू द सांबांर्ी प्रमाण पत्र ऑिलाइि (online)
आवेदि पत्र में निर्ााररत कां निकाओं में अवश्य प्रनवनि करेंगे A अांतवीक्षा के
समय जाांच के क्रम में उपरोक्त सांबांनर्त प्रमाण पत्र की मूल प्रनत प्रस्तुत
करिा अनिवाया होगा अन्यिा अभ्यर्िाता रद्द कर दी जाएगी तिा इसके
नलए आवेदक स्वयां नजम्मेदार होंगेA
13. After issuance of the Advertisement, J.P.S.C vide Press Communiqué
dated 18.02.2021 informed the candidates that only those caste certificate
for extending the benefits of reservation will be valid which has been issued
in terms of Clause-7 (c) etc. of the Advertisement. The date for submission
of online application form was fixed as 15.03.2021, however, same was
extended upto 21.03.2021 and information to the above effect was given to
the candidate by way of press communique dated 15.03.2021. After
issuance of the advertisement, several candidates including Petitioner
submitted their online application forms before the Jharkhand Public
Service Commission for the consideration of their candidature for
appointment against the advertised posts.
14. Petitioner has submitted her Online Application Form under S.T
Category. From perusal of the advertisement it is apparent that for P.T.
examination, reserved categories candidates were only required to mention
their categories in the online application form. The respondent-JPSC after
receiving the online application form decided to conduct the P.T.
Examination on 19.09.2021 and accordingly Admit cards were issued to the
candidates for their appearance in the P.T. Examination and thereafter JPSC
conducted the P.T. Examination on 19.09.2021.
15. After conducting the P.T. Examination and after evaluation of the
OMR Sheets through OMR Scanning Machine, the respondent-JPSC
published the result of the P.T. Examination on 01.11.2021 in which the
petitioner was also declared successful. After publication of the Preliminary
Test Examination result, JPSC vide press communiqué dated 13.11.2021,
informed the successful candidates that date of the submission of the Online
Application Forms for the mains examination has been fixed from
16.11.2021 to 15.12.2021 and detailed instruction for submission of the
online application form is available on the web site of the JPSC. The
instructions at Clause 5, 5(V), 6 and 7 of the said Press Communiqué are
relevant which are quoted below:-
Clause- 5 "मुख्य परीक्षा हेतु भरे जािे वाले Online आवेदि
में अभ्यिी द्वारा पूवा में प्रारां नभक परीक्षा हेतु भरे गए Online
आवेदि में अांककत ककये गये कोरि यिा आर्िाक रूप से कमजोर वगा
(EWS),अत्यांत नपिडा वगा-I(EBC-I), नपिडा वगा-
II(B.C-II), अिुसूनचत जानत (SC),अिुसूनचत जिजानत
(S.T) एवां आकदम जिजानत (Primitive Tribe) के दावे
में सांबांर् में पूवा में निगात नवज्ञापि की कां निका -7 एवां उसके क्रम में
कदिाांक 18.02.2021 को निगात प्रेस नवज्ञनि के अिुसार सम्बांनर्त
जानत प्रमाण-पत्र का निगात सांख्या एवां नतनि तिा निगात करिे वाले
सक्षम प्रानर्कार का उल्लेख करते हुए तत्सांबांर्ी प्रमाण-पत्र
Upload करिा अनिवाया होगा I"
Clause- 5(V) मुख्य परीक्षा हे तु भरे जाने वाले Online
आवेदन में अभ्यर्थी द्वारा पूवव में प्रारं भभक परीक्षा हे तु भरे
गये Online आवेदन में भनिः शक्ता संबंधी आरक्षण के दावे
की स्थर्थभत में काभमवक, प्रशासभनक सुधार तर्था राजभाषा
भवभाग के संकल्प संख्या- 2249 भदनां क- 03.04.2018
के आलोक में (कम से कम 40 प्रभतशत भनिः शक्त) सक्षम
मेभिकल बोिव एवं मुख्य भिभकत्सा पदाभधकारी/भिभकत्सा
अधीक्षक द्वारा प्रभतहस्ताक्षररत भनिः शक्ता प्रमाण-पत्र की
भनगवत संख्या एवं भदनां क का अंकण करते हुए तत्सं बंधी
भनिः शक्ता प्रमाण-पत्र Upload करना अभनवायव होगा।
Clause- 6.अंतवीक्षा के समय अभभलेख सत्यापन के क्रम में
उपरोक्त सभी संबंभधत अभभले ख / प्रमाण -पत्र की मूल
प्रभत प्रस्तुत करना अभनवायव होगा अन्यर्था आयोग द्वारा
अभ्यभर्थवता रद्द की जा सकती है तर्था इसके भलए आवेदक
स्वयं भिम्मेवार होंगे ।
Clause- 7. Online आवेदन में दी गई सूिना एवां Upload
भकए गए अभभले ख / प्रमाण -पत्र में भभन्नता की स्थर्थभत
में आयोग द्वारा अभ्यभर्थवता भनरस्त कर दी जाएगी ।
From perusal of clause -5 of the of the Press Communique, it is
crystal clear that candidates were directed to upload their certificates
alongwith their online application form.
It would also be evident from perusal of Clause -5 (V) of the Press
Communiqué/ instruction i.e. Annexure- D that reserved category candidate
were directed to mention the details of their caste certificate, viz. date and
issuing authority and the same was to be uploaded alongwith online
application form for the mains examination.
16. From perusal of Clause -6 it is apparent that Reserved Categories
Candidates were also required to produce the original certificate for
verification at the time of interview and in Clause -7 it has specifically been
mentioned that candidature of a candidate will be rejected in case, it is
found that there is difference in the documents uploaded by the candidates
in support of their claim alongwith online application form and
document/certificates produced by candidates at the time of verification of
the testimonials.
After issuance of the Press Communiqué dated 13.11.2021,
successful candidates, after going through the terms and conditions,
submitted their online application form for the mains examination and also
uploaded the documents i.e. educational/caste certificate etc. along with
their online application form. Petitioner also submitted her online
application form for the mains examination under S.T category and in
support of her claim for getting the benefits of reservation mentioned her
Caste Certificate No. JHRC/2019/828772 dated 22.10.2019 issued by the
Sub Divisional Officer.
17. In compliance of the Order passed by the Hon'ble High Court in
L.P.A No. 13 of 2022, JPSC published the amended result of the
Preliminary test examination and again issued instructions on 17.02.2022
by way of Press Communiqué by which candidate were again informed
about the instruction for submission of online application form including
submission of caste certificate for extending the benefits of reservation.
18. Thereafter, respondent-JPSC again issued same instructions to the
candidates which were earlier issued and candidates were again informed
about the submission of online application from and uploading their
certificate/caste certificate alongwith their online application from for the
mains examination. Subsequently, JPSC conducted the mains examination
from 11.03.2022 to 13.03.2022 at the different examination Centers
inRanchi.
19. After conducting the mains examination, the respondet-JPSC
published the result of the mains examination on 30.04.2022 and
information to the same was communicated to the candidates through press
communiqué dated 30.04.2022 citing therein that the date of verification of
the documents is fixed from 08.05.2022 and interview from 09.05.2022
with further information that the successful candidates can download their
interview letter from the website of the JPSC from 02.05.2022. The
petitioner was also declared successful in the mains examination and as
such E- interview letter was issued to her. Clause-2 of the E-Interview letter
is relevant which is being quoted herein below:-
2. You are required to bring following document(s) in original
with two sets of self attested photo copies:-
i. 10th certificate and mark sheet for verification of date
of birth.
ii. Graduation certificate and marksheet.
iii. Caste Issued by the competent authority of the Govt.
of Jharkhand (as per Advertisement No. 01/2021)
iv. PH. Certificate issued by the competent authority as
per advertisement (if applicable).
v. Sports certificate as per advertisement (if applicable).
vi. Ex- Service man certificate (if applicable)
vii. Original certificate issued by competent authority of
government of Jharkhand to government employee
having regular and 3 years continuous service for
calming of age relaxation.
20. The Petitioner in support of her claim for extending the benefits of
reservation has mentioned Caste Certificate No. JHRC/2019/828772 dated
22.10.2019 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer in her online application
for mains examination. However, from perusal of online application form it
was found that petitioner has uploaded her residential certificate in the
column prescribed for uploading the caste certificate. From the perusal of
Clause 7(C)(i) of the Advertisement, it is apparent that for extending the
benefits of reservation, candidates belonging to S.T/S.C category were
required to produce caste certificate in Proforma-IV. During the course of
verification of documents of the petitioner, it was found that petitioner in
support of her claim for extending the benefits of reservation has, however,
mentioned Caste Certificate No. JHRC/2019/828772 issued by SDO on
22.10.2019 but it was found that the same is not a caste certificate rather
that same is a local resident (Residential) certificate of Jharkhand issued in
favour of the petitioner.
21. In view of the terms of the Advertisement, especially Clause -22(ञ)
therein and Instructions dated 13.11.2021 issued for submission of online
application form and as per clause -7 of the said Advertisement, it is
apparent that candidature of a candidate will be rejected in the case where it
is a found that there is difference in the documents/certificate uploaded by
the candidate with their online application form and documents/certificate
produced by the candidate at the time of verification of documents and the
benefits of reservation will not be extended to the candidate. As such,
benefits of reservation has not been extended to the petitioner.
22. Aforesaid caste certificate cannot be accepted for extending the
benefits of reservation to the petitioner in terms of the Advertisement and as
such benefits of reservation was not extended to the petitioner and her
candidature was rejected in view of the fact that she got benefits of S.T.
Category in P.T. Examination and Main (Written) Examination result which
would be evident from mark-sheet of the petitioner.
23. From the facts stated above, it is crystal clear that petitioner after
going through the terms and conditions of the advertisement as well as
instruction as contained in the press communiqué dated 13.11.2021
submitted her online application form for mains examination and also
claimed benefits of reservation and in support of her claim also uploaded
the Certificate but during the course of verification it was found that same is
a not a caste certificate rather it was a Residential Certificate and as such in
terms of Clause -7 and in view of the fact that she got the benefits of
reservation in PT and mains examination, her candidature was rejected and
as such there is no illegality in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner.
24. From the facts stated above, it is crystal clear that the petitioner has
committed mistake in uploading her caste certificate during filling-up the
online application form for the mains examination and as such, benefits of
reservation has not been extended to the petitioner and her candidature has
rightly been rejected and there is no illegality in not extending the benefits
of reservation and rejecting the candidature of the petitioner. Rsepondent-
JPSC after conducting the interview on the scheduled dates, published the
final result of the successful candidates on 31.05.2022 on the basis of marks
secured by them in the Mains examination and marks awarded by the
Interview Board and information to the aforesaid effect was also issued to
the Candidates by way of press communiqué dated 31.05.2022. After
publication of the final result on 31.05.2022, JPSC also made
recommendation to the state Govt. for appointment of the successful
candidates vide letter no. 2304 dated 09.06.2022.
25. It would also be evident from the facts stated above that selection
process in terms of the Advertisement No. 01/2021 has already been
completed. From the aforesaid fact, it is clear that it is a case of wrong
submission of caste certificate which cannot be rectified after conclusion of
all the stages of filling-up of Application Forms, conduction of the
examination and publication of the final result thereto and also in view of
the terms and condition of the advertisement and instructions issued by the
JPSC which is binding on all candidates.
26. Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the
petitioner, in course of his argument, tried to impress upon this Court that in
view of Ram Kumar Gijroya Vs. D.S.S.S.B & Anr. (supra), it can
comfortably be inferred that caste certificate could be submitted at any
point of time.
The said contention of Mr. Sinha is not worthy of acceptance by this
Court in view of specific terms and conditions of the Advertisement as well
as instruction of Jharkhand Public Service Commission for submission of
online application form and uploading of the documents. Merely because
Jharkhand Public Service Commission allowed the petitioner to appear in
the recruitment process as Scheduled Tribe category candidate, no right has
accrued to her to claim for reservation. Petitioner after being declared
successful was directed to appear for verification of the testimonials and
there only it was found that in place of caste certificate, she has uploaded
the residential certificate on her online application form and as such, it
becomes a specific ground for not extending the benefit of reservation to
the petitioner.
27. Thereafter, the petitioner produced the caste certificate which was not
considered by respondent-JPSC in view of specific terms and conditions
enshrined in the Advertisement and as such, her candidature was rejected.
Law is well settled that terms and conditions of the Advertisement cannot
be altered as per the suitability of the candidates. If the prayer of the
petitioner is considered, the same will amount to relaxing the terms and
conditions to such other particular candidates. If it is allowed in one case
why not the same be allowed for all other candidates and subsequently, it
will open the flood gate for all the candidates whose candidature has been
rejected on the technical grounds. The petitioner, who appeared in the
examination, accepted the terms and conditions and upon she was declared
unsuccessful has taken a 'U' turn by challenging the terms and conditions of
the Advertisement which is impermissible in the eyes of law. There is a
clear stipulation that, "reserved category candidate will have to upload the
cast certificate along with online application form of the Mains
Examination and the same will have to be produced by the candidate at
the time of verification of the documents and if any difference is found in
the uploaded certificate and those produced at the time of verification, the
candidature of said candidate will be rejected".
The aforesaid contention finds strength from Clause-22 (Ada) (Tha)
of the Advertisement and Clauses- 5, 6 & of the Instruction dated
13.11.2021 as contained in Annexure-D to the counter-affidavit filed by the
respondents.
28. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu Vs. G.
Hemlata & Anr., reported in (2020) 19 SCC 430, has observed that,
"instruction issued by the Commission are mandatory, having force of law
and they are strictly complied with. Strict adherence to the terms and
conditions of the Instruction is to paramount importance. The High Court
in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot
modify/relax the Instructions issued by the Commission". The directions are
in teeth of the instructions which are binding on the candidates appearing in
the recruitment process. No discretion in this regard can be shown by this
Court sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution.
29. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Umesh Chandra Shukla v.
Union of India, reported in (1985) 3 SCC 721 has held as under:
13. .................. Exercise of such power of
moderation is likely to create a feeling of distrust in the
process of selection to public appointments which is
intended to be fair and impartial. It may also result in the
violation of the principle of equality and may lead to
arbitrariness. The cases pointed out by the High Court
are no doubt hard cases, but hard cases cannot be
allowed to make bad law. In the circumstances, we lean
in favour of a strict construction of the Rules and hold
that the High Court has no such power under the Rules.
...................."
30. The terms and the conditions of the Advertisement can neither be
relaxed nor be altered. The said legal proposition is no more res integra and
find strength from the celebrated judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case
of Bedanga Talukdar v. Saifudaullah Khan, reported in (2011) 12 SCC
85, the relevant para of which reads as under:
"29. We have considered the entire matter in detail. In
our opinion, it is too well settled to need any further
reiteration that all appointments to public office have to
be made in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution
of India. In other words, there must be no arbitrariness
resulting from any undue favour being shown to any
candidate. Therefore, the selection process has to be
conducted strictly in accordance with the stipulated
selection procedure. Consequently, when a particular
schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the same has
to be scrupulously maintained. There cannot be any
relaxation in the terms and conditions of the
advertisement unless such a power is specifically
reserved. Such a power could be reserved in the relevant
statutory rules. Even if power of relaxation is provided in
the rules, it must still be mentioned in the advertisement.
In the absence of such power in the rules, it could still be
provided in the advertisement. However, the power of
relaxation, if exercised, has to be given due publicity.
This would be necessary to ensure that those candidates
who become eligible due to the relaxation, are afforded
an equal opportunity to apply and compete. Relaxation of
any condition in advertisement without due publication
would be contrary to the mandate of equality contained
in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
.......................
.....................
32. In the face of such conclusions, we have little
hesitation in concluding that the conclusion recorded by
the High Court is contrary to the facts and materials on
the record. It is settled law that there can be no
relaxation in the terms and conditions contained in the
advertisement unless the power of relaxation is duly
reserved in the relevant rules and/or in the
advertisement. Even if there is a power of relaxation in
the rules, the same would still have to be specifically
indicated in the advertisement. In the present case, no
such rule has been brought to our notice. In such
circumstances, the High Court could not have issued the
impugned direction to consider the claim of Respondent 1
on the basis of identity card submitted after the selection
process was over, with the publication of the select list."
The same view was reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
High Court of Hyderabad v. P. Murali Mohana Reddy, reported in
(2019) 3 SCC 672.
31. This Court in case of Prem Chand Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand
& Ors. (W.P.C. No. 6512 of 2013), disposed of on 04.08.2015, was
pleaded to hold as under:
"7. ............... The contention that Clause 28(i) of the
Rules is inoperative, is liable to be rejected. I am of the
opinion that since the petitioner accepted the conditions
under Clause 28(i) of the Rules and appeared in the
examination, it is not open to the petitioner to challenge
the said condition. ......................"
The said contention of learned Single Judge was affirmed by the
Division Bench in LPA No. 469 of 2015 and later on by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in SLP No. 33684 of 2018 too.
Similar view was taken by this Court in case of Pankaj Kumar
Gupta Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors. (W.P.S. No. 4844 of 2018)
disposed of on 18.04.2023.
32. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ashok Kumar & Anr. Vs. State
of Bihar & Ors., reported in (2017) 4 SCC 357 has observed that, "person
who consciously takes part in selection process cannot thereafter turn
around and challenge method of selection and its outcome".
The same view was reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case
Chandra Prakash Tiwari v. Shakuntala Shukla, reported in (2002) 6
SCC 127 and in case of Union of India v. S. Vinodh Kumar, reported in
(2007) 8 SCC 100.
33. The heavy reliance of learned senior counsel for the petitioner in case
of Ram Kumar Gijroya Vs. D.S.S.S.B & Anr. (supra) is of no help to him
on the ground that, in that case, it has been held that where there is no
specific stipulation regarding submission of caste certificate at a particular
date than the candidature of the candidate concerned could have been
considered but here in the instant case, there is specific stipulation
regarding submission of online application form and thereafter, the same
shall not be considered if at any point of time difference is found in the
online uploaded caste certificate and original caste certificate produced by
the candidate. Here instead of caste certificate, the petitioner uploaded her
Residential Certificate and it was only at the time of verification the said
certificate has been produced which was rightly not accepted and the
candidature of the petitioner was rejected by the respondent-JPSC.
34. The same view was reiterated by this Court in case of Raj Kumar
Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors., reported in 2020 (1) JBCJ 465
(HC), the relevant paragraphs of which reads as under:
"The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A
610/2017 and L.P.A 618/2017 has been pleased to hold
that where there is no cut-off date fixed for submission of
caste certificate in that case Ram Kumar Gijroya case is
applicable and where there is specific date i.e. cut -off
date mentioned in the Advertisement for submission of
caste certificate, the ratio of Ram Kumar Gijroya case
will not be applicable. It is not out of place to mention
here that judgment and Order dated 12.10.2018 passed
in L.P.A No.618/2017 and L.P.A 610 of 2017 were
challenged by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has been pleased to dismiss the same
with the observation "however, the question of Law is
kept open". After passing the order by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in SLP No. 32332/2018, the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in W.P(S) No.
1921/2018 Rohan Thakur -Vs- State and Ors. again
considered the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Ram Kumar Gijroya case as well as Order
passed by this Hon'ble Court in L.P.A No.610 /2017 i.e.
Anil Tanti case and Hon'ble Division after hearing has
been pleased to dismiss the aforesaid case with an
observation vide Para- 3, 4, 5,6 and 7 that in view of the
specific stipulation made in the Advertisement about
obtaining the caste certificate before last date of
submission of Application form, the ratio laid down in
Ram Kumar Gijroya case and Anil Tanti case are not
applicable."
35. The issue in the instant writ petition is that if any specific stipulation
in the Advertisement is not followed, what would be the consequences
of the same. The same has been answered by the Hon'ble Apex Court as
well as this Court in plethora of their judgments. The Hon'ble Apex
Court in case of Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport
Authority of India, reported in (1979) 3 SCC 489 and also in the case
of Air India Ltd. v. Cochin International Airport Ltd., reported in
(2000) 2 SCC 617, held that selection process has to be conducted
strictly in accordance with the selection procedure. All appointments to
public offices have to be made in conformity with Article 14 of the
Constitution of India. Any departure from the rules, specific terms and
conditions stipulated in the Advertisement as well as guidelines will
amount to arbitrariness and illegality committed by the Commission
itself and as such, will be violiative of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India. There must be no arbitrariness resulting from any undue favour
being shown to any candidate. Relaxation of any condition of
Advertisement without due publication would be contrary to mandate
equality as contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
36. In the recent judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case
of Sakshi Arha Vs. Rajasthan High Court & Ors., reported in 2023
SCC Online 662, the Hon'ble Court has held as under:
76. It is also pertinent to note that if the appellants were
allowed to produce the certificates issued after the last
date fixed for the submission of applications mentioned in
the advertisement i.e. 31.08.2021, the other candidates
similarly situated as the appellants might raise a
grievance for not giving them such opportunity. The
appellants who are the defaulters could not be given
preferential treatment by accepting the certificates
produced by them as valid, though the same were
obtained by them after the last date for the submission of
applications fixed in the advertisement. The said
certificates were also not supported by the requisite
affidavits as per the Government circulars dated
09.09.2015 and 08.08.2019.
37. Since the petitioner has been declared unsuccessful, the view of the
respondent-JPSC as well as respondent-State in consideration of the case
of petitioner cannot be faulted with. The contention of learned senior
counsel for the petitioner is not acceptable to this Court and the
decisions relied upon by him is hereby distinguished and not applicable
in the instant case.
38. Resultantly, the writ petition merits dismissal and the same is hereby
dismissed.
(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)
kunal/-
