Back
2016 Supreme(UK) 151
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
Ravindra Singh - Petitioner
Vs
State of Uttarakhand & others - Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 783 of 2016
Decided on : 22-04-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Niranjan Bhatt
For the Respondent: Mr. Vikas Pande, Brief Holder, Ms. Shivangi Gangwar, Mr. N.S. Pundir
The main legal point established in the judgment is that marks obtained by a candidate from a reserved category in the Teacher's Eligibility Test should be calculated for the respective reserved category, providing the benefit of reservation to the candidate.
Headnote:
OBC - Teacher's Eligibility Test - The court held that marks obtained by the petitioner in the Teacher's Eligibility Test (TET) have to be calculated for the OBC category candidate, providing the benefit of reservation to the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, belonging to the Rawalta Community, was not given the OBC certificate despite the community being declared as OBC. The petitioner appeared in the TET and obtained 58% marks, below the 60% qualifying marks for the General category but above the 50% qualifying marks for the OBC category.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's marks in the TET should be calculated for the OBC category, providing the benefit of reservation to the petitioner, based on a previous judgment on a similar controversy.
Issues: The issue before the court was whether the marks obtained by the petitioner in TET have to be calculated for a General category candidate or OBC category candidate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on a previous judgment and held that the marks obtained by the petitioner in TET should be calculated for the OBC category, providing the benefit of reservation to the petitioner.
Final Decision: The present writ petition was disposed of in the same terms and conditions as made in the previous judgment, providing the benefit of reservation to the petitioner.
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
1. The case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision of this Court passed in WPSS No. 290 of 2014 (Km. Babita Vs State of Uttarakhand decided on 16.07.2014). For the sake of convenience, brief facts are stated as under:-
2. The petitioner belongs to a community known as “Rawalta Community”, which has been declared Other Backward Class (in short “OBC”) in the year 2004 i.e. vide order dated 31.01.2004. The OBC certificate, however, was not given to the petitioner. The petitioner appeared in a test known as Teachers Eligibility Test (hereinafter referred to as “TET”) in the year 2013 in which he procured 58% marks. The qualifying marks for a General category candidate are 60% whereas for OBC category candidate it is 50%. The petitioner obtained caste certificate from the authority concerned on 17.12.2015. The petitioner appeared in a selection process for the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade (Samanya), in which he has been selected.
3. The question before this Court is as to whether the marks obtained by the petitioner in TET have to be calculated for a General category candidate or OBC category candidate.
4. A similar controversy has already been decided by this Court vide order dated 16.07.2014 in WPSS No. 290 of 2014 (Km. Babita Vs State of Uttarakhand & others) and has held that in such cases, the marks would be determined for the “Rawalta Community” in the category of OBC and if a candidate secure minimum qualifying marks under the OBC category, he would get the benefit in TET examination as well.
5. The learned counsels appearing for the respondents submit that the matter is squarely covered by the said judgment passed by this Court in WPSS No. 290 of 2014 (Km. Babita Vs State of Uttarakhand & others).
6. In view thereof, the present writ petition is also disposed of in the same terms and conditions as made in the WPSS No. 290 of 2014 (Km. Babita Vs State of Uttarakhand & others).
7. Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner today itself, on the payment of usual charges.
