Strict adherence to prescribed norms for obtaining OBC certificates is essential to maintain fairness and objectivity in examinations.

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 02.04.2018, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, dismissing O.A. No.1417/2016 filed by her, praying inter alia that her candidature in the Combined Graduate Level Examination, 2015 (in short “CGLE, 2015”) conducted by the respondents, be processed and she be granted concessions as are admissible to an OBC candidate.

2. The undisputed facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The respondent no.3/Staff Selection Commission issued an advertisement for various posts under the CGLE, 2015. The petitioner applied for the same. On the results of the examination being declared, the petitioner found that she had secured 436 marks. She was called for an interview scheduled on 25.03.2016. The call letter issued to the petitioner stated amongst others, in para 3(iii) as follows :-

“3(iii) You should possess the OBC certificate (if applicable) in the format prescribed as per the Notice of the Exam. Candidates claiming OBC status may note that OBC certificate mentioning creamy layer status should have been indicted on the Certificate and must have been obtained between 12.06.2012 upto 09.12.2015. You should bring the Caste certificate in case of SC/ST candidate and central Govt. Civilian Employee certificate and NOC in case of availing age relaxation under CGCE, Discharge certificate (must have been discharged till 10.06.2016) in case of Ex-servicemen, OH/HH/VH certificate in prescribed format in case of Physically Handicapped category, duly self attested for verification along with ID proof (Voter card/Identity card issued by the college etc.) at the time of interview.”

3. As is apparent from the aforesaid stipulation, a candidate was required to submit an OBC certificate mentioning the creamy layer status and her community and the said certificate was required to be obtained between 12.06.2012 and 09.12.2015. The format of the certificate was also prescribed by the respondents and all the candidates were required to adhere to the same. We may note that prior to the call letter being issued by the respondent no.3, in the instructions issued to the candidates, it was clarified in para 21(4) as follows :-

“21(4). Candidates seeking reservation benefits for SC/ST/OBC/PH/EXS must ensure that they are entitled to such reservation as per eligibility prescribed in the Notice. They should also be in possession of the required certificates in the prescribed format in support of their claim as stipulated in this Notice. OBC candidates should ensure that they are in possession of valid OBC Certificate issued within the due date issued by the authority mentioned in the format.”

4. When the petitioner appeared for her interview on 15.03.2016, she produced two OBC certificates issued by the State of Haryana, one dated 25.03.2013 and the other dated 15.02.2016. The first certificate dated 25.03.2013 reflected the name of the petitioner along with the name of her father whereas the second certificate issued on 15.02.2016, which was beyond the timeline stipulated by the respondents, reflected the name of the petitioner along with that of her husband, post her marriage. The third certificate that the petitioner sought to place before the respondents after the stage of interview was over, was dated 17.03.2016, stated to be in the format as laid down by the respondents.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents did not consider her OBC certificates dated 25.03.2013 & 15.02.2016. Consequently, she was compelled to submit an undertaking in a printed form indicating a change in her category and stating that she be treated as an unreserved candidate.

6. Expressing an apprehension that she had been wrongly denied reservation and the concessions that are available to a candidate belonging to the OBC category, the petitioner approached the Tribunal by filing the subject Original Application stating inter alia that as an unreserved candidate, she may not be selecte