2023 Supreme(SC) 545

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
AJAY RASTOGI, BELA M. TRIVEDI, JJ.
Sakshi Arha – Appellant
Versus
The Rajasthan High Court & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 16428 of 2022)
With
Priyanka Etc. – Appellant
Versus
The Registrar Examination Etc. – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@Special Leave Petition (C) No. 18296-18299 of 2022)
With
Kuldeep Bhatia – Appellant
Versus
Registrar Examination, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@Special Leave Petition (C) No. 21644 of 2022)
With
Sunil Singh Gurjar – Appellant
Versus
Registrar Examination, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@Special Leave Petition (C) No. 19179 of 2022)
With
Parul Jain – Appellant
Versus
The Rajasthan High Court & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@Special Leave Petition (C) No. 9544 of 2023)
With
Jyoti Beniwal – Appellant
Versus
The Rajasthan High Court & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@Special Leave Petition (C) No. 5654 of 2023)
Decided On : 18-05-2023

Headnote:

(A) Service Law – Appointment – When rules are silent and no date is notified to satisfy eligibility requirement under advertisement, eligibility criteria shall be applied by reference to last date of application by which applications are to be received by recruiting authority – General rule is that while participating in recruitment process, person must possess eligibility qualification on last date fixed for such purpose unless there is any express provision to the contrary and there can be no relaxation in the matter of holding requisite eligibility qualification by date fixed and this has to be established by producing necessary certificate or degree, as the case may be – But, at the same time, in order to avail benefit of reservation or weightage, necessary certificates have to be produced but they are in nature of proof for the purpose of seeking entitlement to claim benefit of reservation, but it has no nexus with last date of application and, it may not be proper to apply any rigid principle in absence of any rule to the contrary – As a matter of caution, every infraction of rule relating to submission of proof in availing benefit of reservation may not necessarily result in rejection of candidature. (Paras 30 and 32)

(B) Service Law – Selection – Post of Civil Judge – There was a gap of one full year between last date for submission of applications and date of interview, during which period economic status and resultant status of “creamy layer/non-creamy layer/EWS” of candidates might have also changed – In absence of a fixed date indicated in advertisement, and when rules are also silent, last date fixed for submitting applications would be date for scrutiny of eligibility of candidates – Qualification and eligibility have to be considered with reference to last date for receiving applications, unless notification calling for applications itself specifies a date. (Paras 29 and 30)

Facts of the case:

Present batch of appellants before us are the members of Other Backward Classes (Non-Creamy Layer; More Backward Class (NCL) and from the category of Economically Weaker Section (EWS), finally qualified in the selection process held for the post of Civil Judge pursuant to an advertisement issued by the respondent dated 22nd July, 2021 but they have not been considered in the category to which they belong for the reason that the certificate of the category which was furnished by each of appellant is subsequent to the last date indicated in advertisement, i.e., 31st August, 2021 and each of them unfortunately could not qualify in open category, filed writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution that came to be dismissed by Division Bench of the High Court, which is subject matter of challenge before this Court.

Findings of Court:

None of appellants had raised any such contention in their writ petitions that they had applied on time and delay in issuing certificates was on the part of competent authorities. Admittedly, no such affidavits as contemplated in circulars dated 09.09.2015 and 08.08.2019 were filed by the appellants either before the competent authority issuing the certificates or before respective High Court at the time of interview, though indicated in notice dated 04.08.2022.

Result : In view of split view matter placed before Chief Justice of India to place the matter before an appropriate Bench.