IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, J.
Mayank Verma, S/o. Shri Tulsi Ram Verma - Petitioner
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Revenue Department and Ors. - Respondents
WPS No. 3959 Of 2017
Decided On : 23-01-2024
Domicile Certificate - Patwari Training Selection - [General Administration Department, Chhattisgarh Government, 2003] - The court discussed the validity of the petitioner's domicile certificate and its compliance with the eligibility criteria for selection. The court emphasized the importance of possessing necessary certificates and the relaxation in the matter of submission of proof. The court also referred to previous judgments to support its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner applied for Patwari Training in District Sukma, Chhattisgarh. Despite scoring higher marks than the selected candidates, the petitioner was not chosen due to issues with the domicile certificate.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had a valid domicile certificate before the cut-off date and that the authorities had wrongly denied the petitioner's appointment for Patwari training.
Issues: Validity of the petitioner's domicile certificate, compliance with eligibility criteria, and the authority's denial of the petitioner's appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The possession of necessary certificates before the cut-off date is essential, and there can be relaxation in the matter of submission of proof. The court emphasized the importance of verifying the genuineness of certificates and the wrongful denial of the petitioner's appointment.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to appoint the petitioner for Patwari training, entitling the petitioner to all consequential benefits except monetary benefits and fixing the petitioner's seniority as per the OBC merit list above the respondent No.4.
ORDER :
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following reliefs :
(ii) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit.”
2. Brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioner are that, the respondent no.1 issued advertisement for Patwari Training Selection Examination-2017 for various district of Chhattisgarh, the petitioner applied for District-Sukma, because he is permanent resident at District-Sukma, as per advertisement, for District- Sukma, the total post was-35, in which 02 posts were reserved for General Category, 03 posts were reserved for O.B.C. (in which For Male-2 and Female-1), for S.C. Candidate 01 posts was reserved and for S.T. Candidate 29 post were reserved, the petitioner and other candidate moved an application for the said post.
3. The petitioner online applied as O.B.C. candidate, in which 3 seat were reserved (For Male-2 and Female-1), the respondents authority scrutinized the application of the petitioner and other candidate, subsequently, on 02.06.2017, issued a letter to the petitioner for verification of his original documents and date was fixed from 05.06.2017 to 15.06.2017. The petitioner appeared before the authority, thereafter the authority verified the documents of the petitioner. After completing all the formalities, on 31.07.2017, the respondent no.2 issued final selection list, whereby respondent no.2 selected private respondent no.4 and 5 for Patwari training and not selected to the petitioner, whereas the petitioner secured second rank of the O.B.C. category in the District Sukma i.e. he obtained higher marks from the private respondents.
4. The petitioner approach before the authority and ask them, why he not selected for patwari training, whereas he obtain higher marks from the private respondents, the authority ask to the petitioner, that in the domicile certificate signature of the authority not shown, he contact from Choice Center, Sukma, wherefrom certificate was issued, regarding correctness of domicile certificate, he said that, this document is correct, no problem in the said documents, the collector authorized to choice center to issue certain certificate and this certificate issued after completing all the formalities. The respondents authority not accepted his domicile certificate, therefore on 14.06.2017, the petitioner again online applied for domicile certificate, on 16.06.2017 his application approved and certificate issued on 19.06.2017, the petitioner submitted this certificate to the respondents authority, but no response, on 31.07.2017, the respondent no.2 issued final selection list in which the petitioner not selected, then, immediately the petitioner moved detail application before the authority, his application is still pending, no decision has been taken by the authority.
5. On 31.07.2017, the respondent no.2 issued final selection list, in which the petitioner not selected, then, immediately, the petitioner moved detail application before the authority, his application is still pending no decision has been taken by the authority. Hence this petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner approached before Ganesh Choice Center Sukma, who is issuing authority of Domicile Certificate, regarding correctness of said certificate, who said, the certificate is correct, he issued about 1000-1200 certificates in the district-Sukma and on the basis of this types certificates, number of candidate obtained service and till date enjoying service benefits, and he also said that, if there is any problem in the said certificate, he can verify from the website and Telep
The possession of necessary certificates before the cut-off date is essential, and there can be relaxation in the matter of submission of proof.
Validity of OBC certificate, importance of caste certificates bearing the name of the parent, and inapplicability of reservation benefits through marriage
The requirement of a caste certificate bearing the name of the parent to verify the actual caste of the candidate at the time of birth is essential for claiming reservation benefits.
A caste certificate's format does not negate its validity if it proves eligibility for OBC status, emphasizing the need for a pragmatic approach in interpreting reservation laws.
An applicant's failure to provide valid documentation as per statutory requirements can lead to rejection of OBC category claims in government employment.
Cut-off date applies only to essential qualifications; valid non-employment and landless certificates produced at document verification must be considered for evaluation marks, even if subsequent to ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.