Hon’ble P.K.S. Baghel, J.—The petitioner is a candidate for the appointment to the post of Assistant Grade-III (General). The Food Corporation of India, the first respondent issued an advertisement on 23rd January, 2015 calling applications from the candidates to a large number of posts mentioned in the advertisement. Total 4318 posts were advertised in the said advertisement. Pursuant to the advertisement, the petitioner made an application for appointment on the post of Assistant Grade III.

2. It is stated that essential qualification mentioned in the advertisement was Bachelor Degree in any discipline alongwith working experience in computer. The petitioner claims that he fulfills the eligibility criteria, he did his Bachelor of Science (Honours) in the year 2008 from Bundelkhand University. He claims that he has done a Computer Foundation Course from the same University and has a certificate of Course on Computer Concepts (CCC) issued by the National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT). The petitioner claims that he is under the Scheduled Caste category.

3. The petitioner qualified the written examination and he ranked 56 in the order of merit. It is stated in paragraph-8 of the writ petition that a call letter was issued to the petitioner on 31st December, 2015 and he appeared with his original documents on the scheduled date, time and place i.e. 20th January, 2016 at 01.00 p.m. in the office of the first respondent and placed all such documents, which he has brought on record as annexure-2 to the writ petition, before the authority. After perusing the same, the authority was fully satisfied, however, by an order dated 05th June, 2016 the petitioner came to know that the first respondent has declared the final result and the petitioner’s candidature has been cancelled by a cryptic order.

4. At the time of moving of this writ petition, on 27th June, 2016 the Court has directed to put up this case as fresh on 05th July, 2016. On 05th July, 2016 the first respondent filed a short counter-affidavit without adverting to the material facts averred in the writ petition. The stand taken in the short counter-affidavit is that the petitioner, at the time of verification, could not submit the caste certificate hence his candidature has been cancelled.

5. A rejoinder-affidavit to the short counter-affidavit has been filed, wherein the said fact has been denied and the petitioner has brought on record the caste certificate issued by the competent authority i.e. the Tehsildar, Sadar, Kanpur Nagar dated 29th October, 2013 as annexure-2 to the rejoinder-affidavit. The same document has been appended by the petitioner alongwith the writ petition also.

6. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order has been passed in utter disregard to the principles of natural justice as no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner before cancelling his candidature and it does not contain any reason. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgements of the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and another, Civil Appeal No. 1691 of 2016 and Mohinder Singh Gill and another v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and others, (1978) 1 SCC 405.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents Sri S.K. Mishra submits that there is no requirement to assign any reason while cancelling the candidature of a candidate. The reasons have been mentioned in the short counter-affidavit. He further submits that the Corporation has been authorized by the Parliament to frame statutory rules hence the statutory rules have been framed by the Food Corporation of India. It was further submitted that the condition mentioned in the advertisement is as sacrosanct as the law and it has statutory flavour. No other submission has been made.

8. The learned counsel for the respondent has drawn the attention of the Court to an order passed by this Court to