Back
MANOJ MISRA, PRASANNA B. VARALE
Poonam Dwivedi – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
Key Points: - The UP EWS Act requires certificates for the financial year prior to the year of application; certificates not so dated are invalid (!) (!) (!) . - Certificates issued before the relevant financial year or not conforming to the prescribed format render candidates ineligible for EWS reservation (!) (!) . - The Division Benches held that erroneous or non-compliant EWS certificates justify rejecting the EWS claims in recruitment, and appeals were dismissed, with no order as to costs (!) (!) . - The High Court found that confusion existed due to advertisement and certificate wording; the Supreme Court ultimately upheld rejection of certificates not valid for the correct financial year (!) (!) . - The Court emphasized that certificates should be issued by eligible authorities and must reflect income/assets for the correct financial year, failing which candidatures may not be considered for EWS (!) (!) . - The Court noted that applicants who relied on certificates issued in error due to state guidelines faced adverse impact, but still upheld the rejection due to strict compliance requirements (!) (!) . - The matter highlights the need for clear state guidance to align certificates with advertisement terms to avoid eligibility disputes (!) .
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. issuance of ews certificates and application dates. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. applicants' claims and grounds for challenge. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. court's observations on confusion and validity of ews certificates. (Para 12 , 15) |
| 4. requirement of compliance with advertisement provisions. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. validity of certificate and legal standards for ews. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 6. final dismissal of appeals and order for costs. (Para 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
MANOJ MISRA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals impugn a common judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow1[High Court] dated 09.01.2023 in Special Appeal Nos. 464, 465, 466 and 467 of 2022 preferred against an order of Single Judge of the High Court dated 19.10.2022 in Writ A No. 5392 of 2022 (Poonam Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and others); Writ A No.6974 of 2022 (Divya Awasthi v. State of U.P. and others); Writ A No. 6911 of 2022 (Archana Saxena v. State of U.P. and others); Writ A No. 5264 of 2022 (Komal v. State of U.P. and others) and Writ A No. 6357 of 2022 (Shanu Tiwari v. State of U.P. and others).
3. On 15.12.2021, the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Service Selection Comm
The court held that EWS certificates must be valid for the relevant financial year and adhere to the prescribed format; any deviation renders them invalid for claiming reservation benefits.
The judgment establishes the importance of adhering to the specified financial year and the competence of the issuing authority for EWS eligibility, emphasizing that technical irregularities and negl....
EWS certificate with clerical error in validity year but correct income data and issuer's clarification must be accepted over hyper-technical rejection; substance prevails where format complies and e....
Strict compliance with eligibility criteria and submission deadlines is critical for reservation categories; late submissions invalidate claims for benefits.
The court upheld the requirement for candidates to submit an EWS Certificate for the relevant financial year, emphasizing adherence to eligibility criteria for reservation benefits.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
