The court held that where a recruitment process provides a specific window for candidates to amend their categories and government circulars permit the submission of category certificates post-deadline via affidavit, the state must consider such claims if the candidate substantively qualified for the category on the cut-off date.

Order

1. Issue notices. Issue notices of stay application also.

2. Mr. Mukesh Dave, learned AGC is directed to accept notices on behalf of the respondents. Therefore, service is complete.

3. Petitioner herein is before this Court, aggrieved by an undated decision rejecting her candidature in the EWS category instead treating her in the General category for the selection process on the post of Female Health Worker.

4. Briefly speaking relevant facts of the case are as follows:

4.1. The petitioner was born in the state of Haryana and later migrated to the state of Rajasthan after her marriage. She belongs to the EWS category, as her gross family income is below the prescribed limit. The respondents issued an advertisement dated 19.05.2023 for the post of Female Health Worker. The petitioner, being eligible, applied for the position. However, as a migrant candidate, she was forced to submit the application in the unreserved category, despite belonging to the EWS category. The petitioner approached the respondents to change her category vide representation dated 16.04.2026.

4.2. Subsequently, the respondents issued a list for document verification after changing the categories of candidates who had submitted representations which were accepted. However, the petitioner was inexplicably not called for verification in EWS category.

4.3. The respondents then issued a provisional list dated 07.10.2023 but despite the petitioner having secured marks higher than the cutoff in the EWS-Female category, she was excluded from the recruitment process. Aggrieved, the petitioner submitted another representation requesting that her candidature be considered in the EWS category. Despite this, when the final list dated 06.10.2024 was issued, the petitioner's name was not included, even though she had obtained marks higher than the cutoff for the EWS category, and no valid reason was provided.

4.4. Subsequently, the respondents gave an undated decision rejecting her representations. Hence, this petition.

5. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

6. First and foremost, the status of the petitioner of belonging to Economically Weaker Section ('EWS') category is not in dispute herein. Her candidature in the said category was rejected on the ground that the EWS certificate provided to her was after the cut-off date of advertisement.

7. In this context reference may be had to a Circular dated 17.10.2022 (Annex.14), English translation (as provided by counsel) of which reads as under:

"This department had issued the following in Circular No. 7 (1) Personnel/K-2/2019, dated 20.01.2022:

‘Reservation provisions for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), Extremely Backward Classes (EBC), and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) candidates are included in all service rules for the recruitment to posts under the state government. Candidates seeking the benefit of reservation in recruitment to Central and State government posts must submit a certificate of the relevant category, based on which their eligibility in the respective category is assessed. Candidates are entitled to the benefit of reservation from the date the certificate is issued, and it is mandatory for the candidate to possess a certificate issued by the competent authority before the last date of application. The