1. Recruitment for constable posts — Candidate filled application in English but used Hindi on OMR sheet — Rejection of candidature for violating language instructions. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 6 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 624
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HEMANT GUPTA, VIKRAM NATH, JJ.
Union of India & Ors. – Appellants
VERSUS
Mahendra Singh - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 4807 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP (Civil) No. 19886 of 2019)
Decided On : 25-07-2022
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Madhavi Divan, ASG Amrish Kumar, Priyanka Das, Nidhi Khanna, Vimla Sinha, Mansi Kumari, Raj Bahadur Yadav, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Prashant Bhushan, Rahul Gupta, Alice Raj, Advocates
For the Appellant(s) :Madhavi Divan, ASG Amrish Kumar, Priyanka Das, Nidhi Khanna, Vimla Sinha, Mansi Kumari, Raj Bahadur Yadav, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Prashant Bhushan, Rahul Gupta, Alice Raj, Advocates
IMPORTANT POINT
Appointment – If a particular procedure in filling up application form is prescribed, application form should be filled up following that procedure alone.
Headnote:
Service Law – Appointment – Rejection of candidature – Condition that language in application form shall be used for the purposes of OMR examination is for reason that in case any dispute arises in respect of identity of candidate, same can be verified from two handwritings – If a particular procedure in filling up application form is prescribed, application form should be filled up following that procedure alone – Since advertisement contemplated manner of filling up of application form and also attempting of answer sheets, it has to be done in the manner so prescribed – Reasoning given by Division Bench of High Court that on account of lapse of time, writ petitioner might have attempted answer sheet in a different language is not justified as use of different language itself disentitles writ petitioner from any indulgence in exercise of power of judicial review – Since writ petitioner has used different language for filling up of application form and OMR answer book, his candidature was rightly rejected by appellants – Order passed by High Court set aside and writ petition dismissed. (Paras 12, 14, 17, 18 and 19)
Facts of the case:
Challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad whereby appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed. Such appeal was directed against an order passed by the learned Single Bench of the High Court, wherein, an order dated 27.1.2017 passed by the appellants was quashed and thus, consequently, the candidature of the respondent was to be considered and accepted by the appellants.
Findings of Court:
Sole reasoning given by the Division Bench of the High Court of time gap between the filling up of the application form and examination, and hence inadvertent filling up of OMR sheet in Hindi by the writ petitioner is based on surmises and conjectures. Once writ petitioner has filled the application form in English, having also signed in English, it cannot be said to be an inadvertent mistake when he has written the para in Hindi. Such writing in different language violates the instruction clearly mentioned in advertisement.
Question required to be examined herein is to the effect of violation of the condition provided in the advertisement that application has to be in the language for which the candidates want
to attempt the question paper, and what is the effect of using different language in the application form than the OMR sheet.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether using a different language in the application form versus the OMR sheet constitutes a mandatory requirement for rejection or a mere irregularity. (Para 10 )
3. Use of different languages violates instructions intended to prevent impersonation and ensure probity; time gap does not justify inadvertent language change. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 )
4. Where a procedure is prescribed to be performed in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner or not at all. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 )
5. Appeal allowed — High Court order set aside — Rejection of candidature upheld. (Para 18 , 19 )
6. Does using a different language in the OMR sheet than in the application form justify rejection of candidature?
Yes. The requirement to use the same language is intended to prevent impersonation and maintain probity. Violating this clear instruction in the advertisement disentitles the candidate from indulgence under judicial review. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 , 18 )
7. What is the legal effect when a procedure prescribes a specific manner for performing an act?
If a thing is provided to be done in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner and in no other manner; other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 )
8. Can a time gap between the application and the examination excuse a candidate's failure to follow language instructions on an OMR sheet?
No. The court held that such reasoning is based on surmises and conjectures, as choosing a different language for the OMR sheet after signing the application in English is a violation of instructions. (Para 13 )
JUDGMENT
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
1. The challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad whereby appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed. Such appeal was directed against an order passed by the learned Single Bench of the High Court, wherein, an order dated 27.1.2017 passed by the appellants was quashed and thus, consequently, the candidature of the respondent [For short, the ‘writ petitioner’] was to be considered and accepted by the appellants.
2. The Employment Notice No. 1/2011 was published to fill up 11952 posts of Constables in the Railway Protection Force [For short, the ‘RPF’]. The process of selection comprised of written examination consisting of 120 multiple choice objection type questions of one mark each and of 90 minutes duration. The candidates had to obtain at least 35% marks (30% in the case of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates) in the written examination for being considered for other Test such as Physical Efficiency Test [For short, the ‘PET’]. Para 8 Clause B of the Advertisement gives the requirement of an application form and also that the said application should be filled up by the candidates in their own handwriting, in Hindi or English only. The applications were required to be accompanied by a self-attested matriculation certificate as proof of educational qualification and age. The relevant conditions read as under:
“8. xxx xxx
B. Application form' a) The format of the application form is given in Annexure 'A'. Application forms can be downloaded from the official website of Indian Railways (www.indlanrailways.gov.in) or taken from the Employment News or from this advertisement and submitted on A-4 size bond paper, using one side only and sent to the Nodal Chief Security Commissioner corresponding to the language chosen for the Question Paper. Only one application need be sent. The addresses of the Nodal Chief Security Commissioners, the details of the person in whose favour the Draft/IPO shall be drawn and the place where payable are given below. The languages for the question paper are also shown against each Nodal Chief Security Commissioner for the convenience of the applicants.
| Group No. | Address of the Nodal Chief Security Commissioner | Draft/IPO drawn in favour of | Place where Payable | Languages for question paper |
| 1 | The Chief Security Commissioner, North Eastern Railway, Post Box Number-2 Head Post Office, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh. | The Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer, North Eastern Railway. | Gorakhpur , UP | Hindi, English, Urdu, Punjabi, Gujarati. |
xx xx xx
(e) Applications should be filled by the candidates in their own handwriting, in Hindi or English only. Left Hand thumb impression in the case of Male applicants and Right-Hand thumb impression in case of Female applicants shall be affixed in the box given at the bottom of the application. Applications signed in capital letters/spaced-out letters will be treated as invalid. Applications with correction or overwriting or smudged thumb impression may be rejected.
xx xx xx
9 (e) Impersonation, if any, detected at any stage of the recruitment, may result in initiating criminal cases against the applicant and the impersonator as well as canceling the candidature of the applicant.”
3. The writ petitioner belongs to Other Backward Class category and has filled up his application form along with Indian Postal Order dated 5.3.2011 in English. His signatures are in English consisting of two letters “M” and “S”. Such application form is accompanied with a self-attested marksheet of high school examination and other certificates. All such documents are self-attested and signed in Hindi.
4. The writ petitioner appeared for the written test on 23.6.2013 where he wrote the paragraph in Hindi on the OMR sheet, though in the application form, he had written it in English. He signed in Hindi then. Subsequently, when t
