Back
2019 Supreme(P&H) 2305
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rajiv Sharma, Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.
Randhir Singh Kainth And Other - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India And Others - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition Nos. 16764 and 16758 of 2009
Decided On : 29-01-2019
Mr. O.P. Sharma, Advocate, for the Appellant; Ms. Upasana Dhawan, Advocate, for the Respondent
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the creamy layer status for OBC determination is based on the income of the parents and not the individual's income, as per relevant Government instructions and earlier decisions.
Headnote:
OBC Certificate - Validity - Administrative Manager Post - [Section 14(3) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985] - The court discussed the validity of the OBC certificate issued to the petitioner for the post of Administrative Manager. The court referred to the relevant Government instructions and earlier decisions to conclude that the creamy layer status is to be determined based on the income of the parents and not the individual's income. The court held that the OBC certificate issued to the petitioner was valid and directed reinstatement with all consequential benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the termination of his services based on the validity of his OBC certificate for the post of Administrative Manager.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the OBC certificate issued to the petitioner was valid and held him entitled to reinstatement with all consequential benefits.
Issues: Validity of OBC certificate, Termination of services, Reinstatement
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the creamy layer status is to be determined based on the income of the parents and not the individual's income, as per relevant Government instructions and earlier decisions.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the Tribunal, held the OBC certificate valid, and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner with all consequential benefits. The respondents were also directed to pay a final settlement of Rs. 8 lakhs to the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Harinder Singh Sidhu, J. - This judgment shall dispose of two writ petitions, namely CWP Nos. 16758 and 16764 of 2009, both filed by Randhir Singh Kainth, as the issue involved therein is the same..
2. For the purpose of judgment, the facts are taken from CWP No. 16764 of 2009.
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition impugning the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench dated 13.07.2009.
4. The facts in brief are that on 30.9.1969, the petitioner was appointed as Upper Division Clerk in the office of Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla in the General Category. After passing the Departmental examination, he was promoted as Section Officer. On 7.5.1983 he was appointed to the post of Accounts Officer in the Central Tool Room, Ludhiana, which is a Government of India Society, .
5. On 13.8.1990, the Government of India issued Instructions for providing 27% reservation for socially and economically backward classes in civil posts and services under the Government of India. On 8.9.1993, the Government of India issued a notification categorising the creamy layer amongst the OBCs to whom the benefit of reservation of Backward Class would not be applicable.
6. As the petitioner belongs to Chhimba community, which was notified as a Backward Class by the State of Punjab he applied for and was issued OBC certificate by Tehsildar (West) Ludhiana on 24.10.1997. In January, 1998, the Central Tool Room Ludhiana (respondent No. 3) advertised one post of Administrative Manager in the pay scale of Rs. 10000-325-15200 which was reserved for the OBC category. The petitioner applied for the same on the basis of OBC certificate issued to him. He appeared for the interview on 9.6.1998. The Central Tool Room Employees Union, Ludhiana submitted a representation to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ludhiana and the Chairman, Central Tool Room for cancelling OBC certificate of the petitioner stating that his salary earned on his existing job was more than Rs. 1,00,000/- per annum and he fell within the creamy layer. The petitioner was selected for the post of Administrative Manager, subject to the condition that his certificate be got verified before issue of appointment letter. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared before the Tehsildar and also represented to the Deputy Commissioner to verify his OBC certificate but no action was taken by them. The petitioner was issued appointment letter for the post of Administrative Manager, subject to verification of the OBC certificate. He joined on the said post on 6.7.1999 after resigning from the post of Assistant Manager (Accounts).
7. The Central Tool Room Employees Union, Ludhiana filed CWP No. 16754 of 1999 titled "CTR Ministerial Staff Welfare Association vs. Union of India, etc." in the nature of a PIL praying for quashing the OBC certificate issued to the petitioner and for declaring his appointment as Administrative Manager as illegal. In the said writ petition, an additional affidavit dated 14.9.2001 was filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana stating that the OBC certificate had been issued to the petitioner without getting the facts verified and that it had not been countersigned by the District Magistrate. The writ petition was disposed of on 14.2.2002 with a direction to the Central Tool Room to pass appropriate order keeping in view the fact that the OBC certificate produced by the petitioner was not genuine. In compliance therewith, the services of the petitioner were terminated on 2.3.2002. Later on an application filed by the petitioner the order dated 14.2.2002 was recalled. The petition was heard again and finally disposed of on 12.11.2002 with a direction to Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana to enquire into the genuineness of the OBC certificate issued to the petitioner. It was further directed that if the certificate is not genuine, it would be ca
