SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 2917

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Vikas Mahajan, JJ.
Neeraj Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 11660 of 2022 & CM No.34620 of 2022(for stay)
Decided On : 15-02-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Amit Raghav with Ms.Seema Dolo, Advocates, for the Petitioner..
Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Kaushal Jeet Kait, GP & Mr. Jatin Yadav, Advocates, for the Respondent.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the respondents to comply with principles of natural justice, provide equal opportunities to candidates, and consider peculiar facts and circumstances in recruitment disputes.

Headnote:

Natural Justice - Recruitment Dispute - Indian Coast Guard - Stage II, III, IV - [DOCUMENT VERIFICATION] - [Stage II, III, IV] - [Para 6(b)(ii) of the advertisement, para 14 note (xxi)(xxix) & (xxv) of Appendix-A of E-admit card, FAQs]

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner seeks quashing of the result dated 15.07.2022 to the extent that he has been declared failed in document verification examination by the respondent no.2 and also seeks setting aside of the cancellation of his candidature for recruitment in the Indian Coast Guard 02/2022 batch as Navik (GD). Petitioner applied for the post of Navik (General Duty) and cleared Stage I and II, but was disqualified at the document verification stage for uploading an incorrect document.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to rectify the error in the online application form, despite other candidates being granted such an opportunity. The court held that the petitioner did not upload the incorrect document to gain an advantage and was discriminated against in the grant of an opportunity to rectify the defect. The court also noted that the petitioner was otherwise eligible for the post and there was no deliberate intent on his part to upload an incorrect document.

Issues: The issues revolved around the principles of natural justice, the obligation of the respondents to inform the candidate about any discrepancy, and the application of the FAQs in the recruitment process.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondents failed to comply with principles of natural justice by not granting the petitioner an opportunity to rectify the error in the online application form. The court also emphasized that the FAQs formed part of the application process and that the petitioner was entitled to relief and could not be granted relief earlier.

Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in Stage II of the subsequent advertisement issued in August/September, 2022, without entitlement to any seniority or other benefits. The petitioner was also required to undergo physical fitness tests and medical examinations for eligibility in Stage III.

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)--Petitioner seeks quashing of the result dated 15.07.2022 to the extent that he has been declared failed in document verification examination by the respondent no.2 and also seeks setting aside of the cancellation of his candidature for recruitment in the Indian Coast Guard 02/2022 batch as Navik (GD).

2. Petitioner applied to the post for being selected as Navik (General Duty) pursuant to an advertisement (undated) issued by the respondents with regard to recruitment inter alia as Navik (General Duty) wherein the applications were to be accepted commencing from 4th January, 2022 to 14th January, 2022.

3. The advertisement in paragraph 7 inter alia stipulated that applications would be accepted `Online only'. Paragraph 7 also prescribed the documents that had to be uploaded along with the application.

4. The documents stipulated in the application were segregated into five categories i.e. (i) compulsory documents to be uploaded by all candidates during online application; (ii) additional documents to be uploaded by Navik (GD) candidates only during online application; (iii) additional documents to be uploaded by Yantrik (mechanical, Electrical and Electronics) candidates only during online application; (iv) documents to be uploaded if shortlisted for Stage II which was further sub-categorized into documents to be uploaded by (aa) all candidates; (ab) Navik (GD) candidates; and, (ac) Yantrik candidates; and, (v) documents to be uploaded by the candidates if shortlisted for Stage II.

5. The advertisement further stipulated the selection procedure which inter alia provided that selection of recruits would be based on All India order of merit on their performance in Stage I, II, III and IV and the number of vacancies available for the post. It also stipulated that clearing all Stages I, II, III, IV and satisfactory performance in training was compulsory for recruitment in the Indian Coast Guard.

6. The Stages stipulated in the advertisement were provided as Stage I - Written Examination, Stage II involved physical fitness test, document verification and initial medicals examination, Stage III stipulated document verification, final medicals at INS Chilka, submission of original document, police verification and other associated forms and State IV involved training at INS Chilka.

7. Candidates clearing Stage I would progress to Stage II and so on depending on the number of vacancies available and ratio decided by the Indian Coast Guard.

8. Petitioner cleared Stage I, i.e., written examination and progressed on to Stage II. In Stage II, he also cleared the physical fitness test. However, at the stage of document verification he was disqualified and his candidature was rejected. The reason given for his disqualification is as under:

    "NOT SHORTLISTED FOR STAGE-III FAILED IN STAGE-II DOCUMENT VERIFICATION

    As you are not a bonafide candidate because your application was with false information and did not match with information as per documents uploaded in application and was in contravention of Uploaded 10th Mark sheet in place of Photo ID Proof. Fail in document verification as per `para 6(b)(ii) of the advertisement' and `para 14 note (xxi)(xxix) & (xxv) of Appendix-A of E-admit card. "

9. Petitioner was disqualified and was not shortlisted for Stage III on the ground that he had uploaded a 10th Mark Sheet in place of Photo ID proof.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents failed to comply with principles of natural justice and also failed to give an opportunity to the petitioner to rectify the defect in the online application form. She submits that petitioner did not have wherewithal to fill up the application form online on his own and as such approached a Cyber Cafe for the purposes of uploading the form.

11. She submits that on account of an error he uploaded his 10th class Mark Sheet in place of the Aadhar Card as was required in the advertisement.

12. She

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top