Back
2003 Supreme(SC) 849
2003(6) Supreme 427
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Shivaraj V. Patil and D.M. Dharmadhikari, JJ.
Sunil Dutt Sharma -Appellant
versus
Chief Regional Manager, HPC Ltd. and Others -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 7387 of 2001
Decided on : 3-9-2003
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : G.L. Sanghi, Senior Advocate, S.C. Gupta, A.G. Sharma, Sanjay Pal, Debya J. Neog, Ms. Lalita Kaushik, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Dr. Rajiv Dhavan, Senior Advocate, Sanjay Kapur, Rajiv Kapur, Ms. Shubhra Kapur and B.K. Satija, Advocates.
Headnote:ADMINISTRATIVE LAW-Selection of respondent for distributionship of L.P.G. Agency in the defence category of ex-service men who had limited means of livelihood -Challenged on ground that eligibility certificate produced by respondent from Director-General of Resettlement of Defence Service, was not valid as not issued in respect of particular advertisement in which applications were invited for grant of agency for a particular location-Guidelines for DGR for issuance of eligibility certificate-High Court was justified in negativing contention of appellant-Alleged invalidity of eligibility certificate being of a date prior to date of advertisement was merely a technical objection and not a substantial ground to upset the selection.
Held : After reading the guidelines and hearing the reply of the learned senior counsel appearing for the contesting respondent, we find that the High Court was fully justified in negativing the contention advanced for the appellant questioning the validity of the eligibility certificate issued in favour of contesting respondent. The purpose of obtaining the eligibility certificate from the Director-General of Resettlement in defence services is obviously with a view to identify suitable candidates in the defence category for being considered for selection and appointment for award of gas agency. The candidate who has been certified to be covered in the defence category and fulfilling the required income limit cannot lose his eligibility merely because certificate was not obtained pursuant to a particular advertisement and for a particular location. The role of the Director-General of Resettlement is limited to ascertaining the qualification of the candidate being in the defence category and certifying that he fulfils the requirement of prescribed income limit. The matter of selection from amongst the competing candidates falling in defence category has to be left to the decision of the Board. (Para 10)
In the instant case, there was nothing adverse before the Board to show that the contesting respondent has between the date of eligibility certificate i.e. 16.8.1993 and issuance of advertisement dated 11.1.1994 for Jagroan township, improved his financial position and has crossed the prescribed income limit to render him ineligible for grant of agency under the defence category of ex-serviceman with limited source of livelihood. The alleged invalidity of the eligibility certificate being of a date prior to the date of advertisement is merely a technical objection and not a substantial ground to upset the selection made by the board. The High Court was, therefore, right in dismissing the Writ Petition. (Para 13)
JUDGMENT
Dharmadhikari, J.-In the contest for award of distributorship for Liquified Petroleum Gas Agency in the township of Jagraon in District Ludhiana, Punjab, in the defence category of ex-servicemen who have limited means of livelihood, respondent - Rajinder Sidhu was selected by the Oil Selection Board [hereinafter referred to as the Board ] and pursuant to a letter of appointment issued on 26.9.1994, he has started his business of gas agency.
2. The appellant - Capt. Sunil Dutt Sharma challenged the selection and appointment of respondent - Rajinder Sidhu in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The ground urged was that the eligibility certificate produced by the contesting respondent from Director-General of Resettlement (DGR) of Defence services, was not valid as it was issued for gas agency at Amritsar Cantt and not for gas agency in the township of Jagraon.
3. The learned single Judge in the writ petition and the Divison Bench, in appeal, before the High Court, repelled the challenge to validity of the eligibility certificate of the contesting respondent and upheld his selection and appointment for the gas agency. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the High Court, the appellant has approached this Court in this appeal.
4. Learned senior counsel Shri G.L. Sanghi appearing for the appellant, took this Court through the contents of the guidelines issued for issuance of eligibility certificate by the DGR and the guidelines to be followed by the Board for awarding the gas agency. Reading its relevant portions, the contention advanced before the High Court is reiterated before us. The main thrust of the argument advanced on behalf of the appellant is that the eligibility certificate has to be issued in respect of a particular advertisement in which applications are invited for grant of gas agency at a particular location. A certificate issued for another gas agency at a different location pursuant to a different advertisement was not valid for award of gas agency for the township of Jagraon. The submission made is that the guidelines clearly indicate that the eligibility certificate qua a particular advertisement should certify that the applicant is covered under the defence category and has also limited means of livelihood meaning annual income of his family is less than Rs. 50,000/-.
5. Learned senior counsel argued that if the guidelines are interpreted as is sought to be done on behalf of the contesting respondent, even a stale eligibility certificate issued for previous years and for a different advertisement and location of gas agency would be basis for award of gas agency for different location and for different advertisement. This will result in misguiding the Board about the present status of the applicant in the defence category on the basis of limited means of livelihood . It is submitted that up-to-date position of the applicant qua a particular advertisement and a location is the basic requirement of a valid eligibility certificate from the DGR.
6. We have also heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Rajiv Dhavan appearing for the contesting respondent who has supported the reasoning and conclusions in the impugned orders of the High Court.
7. The advertisement for award of LPG agency for Jagraon township was issued on 11.1.1994. The eligibility certificate issued from Director-General of Resettlement is dated 16.8.1993 which cannot be said to be a very old or stale eligibility certificate for gas agency. It is not the case of the appellant before the High Court or in this Court that the contesting respondent does not fall in the defence category of ex-servicemen and that he did not fulfil the income limit prescribed for being covered by the category of ex-servicemen with limited means of livelihood. What is being contended is that in the absence of certificate issued after the advertisement for Jagraon township showing the current financial status of the candicate under consideraton there was no available source
