A candidate's eligibility for reserved categories should not solely depend on possessing a caste certificate on the application date if it is submitted within stipulated additional time, as per Brochure provisions.

ORDER :

1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of impugned letter dated 10.11.2020 (Annexure-12) whereby the petitioner’s application for allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership stood rejected.

2. The facts are that in pursuance to Advertisement dated 14.12.2018, the petitioner applied on 27.12.2018 through online mode. The last date specified for submission of application was 12.01.2019. Admittedly, the petitioner applied in Other Backward Class (for short ‘OBC’) category. However, she did not possess a valid OBC certificate on the date of applying i.e. 27.12.2018. She applied for issuance of OBC certificate on 02.01.2019 and the same was issued to her on 28.01.2019.

3. A provisional list of selected candidates was issued by the respondent Corporation on 25.01.2020 and when called upon, the petitioner submitted all the relevant documents including OBC certificate, on 03.02.2020. However, the candidature of the petitioner stood rejected on the count that she did not possess a valid OBC certificate on the date of submission of application i.e. 27.12.2018.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the Brochure governing the allotment of Dealership in question, the certificates/documents for Eligibility/Specific Eligibility criteria were required to be submitted by the selected candidates within ten days of the intimation. Further, additional ten days’ time was to be granted in case the selected candidate failed to submit the applicable certificate/document. It is only if the candidate failed to provide the requisite document within that additional time that his/her candidature could have been rejected.

5. Counsel submitted that the petitioner submitted all the requisite documents within a period of ten days of intimation to her and hence, her candidature could not have been rejected.

6. Per contra learned counsel for the respondent Corporation submitted that it was specific condition as per the Brochure that all certificates/documents required for meeting the Eligibility/Specific Eligibility criteria ought to have been in possession of the applicant and valid as on the date of application. Admittedly, the petitioner did not possess a valid OBC certificate on 27.12.2018, the date on which she applied and hence, OBC certificate as submitted by her on 03.02.2020 could not have been considered and her candidature was rightly rejected.

7. While relying upon Bombay High Court judgment in Swati vs. Government of India & Anr. (Writ Petition No. 1319/2020 and CA No. 10142) decided on 29.09.2021, Counsel submitted that a candidate has to be eligible to apply for Retail Outlet Dealership on the date of application as per the Brochure of the Petroleum Company.

8. In rejoinder Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a specific clause appended to Note-1 of Clause-4 provides for grant of an additional ten days time in cases of Caste Validity Certificate. The incorporation of the said clause definitely is with an intent to grant additional ten days time to the selected candidate from the date of intimation. Meaning thereby, the certificate as submitted by the petitioner was clearly within the stipulated time and hence, ought to have been considered.

9. Learned counsel, further while relying upon Hon’ble Apex Court judgment in Ram Kumar Gijroya vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr. (2016) 4 SCC 754 submitted that the candidature of the petitioner could not have been rejected simply on count of she not being in possession of a caste certificate on the date of application when she submitted