Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 664 (DEL)

Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Poonam Chauhan

2008-07-09

MANMOHAN SARIN, VEENA BIRBAL

body2008
Veena Birbal, J. 1. Petitioner assails the order dated 29.11.2007, by which the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 449/2007 has set aside order dated 19.10.2006, passed by the Government of NCT of Delhi, whereby the candidature of respondent for post of “Domestic Science teacher” was cancelled. The ground of cancellation was that OBC certificate dated 05.02.2005 submitted by her had been issued by the SDM, Seelampur after the closure of date of submission of application form. 2. The facts as alleged in the petition are as under : On 30.04.2004, petitioner, i.e. Government of NCT of Delhi had advertised certain vacancies for Group ‘B’ posts through Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, hereinafter referred to as DSSSB. Respondent applied for the post of “Domestic Teacher” under the category of OBC candidate on 18.05.2004. The last date of receipt of application forms was 24.05.2004. On 28.11.2004, the examination for the said post was held. Petitioners vide letter dated 24.01.2005 requested respondent to furnish attested copies of relevant documents in support of her claim for reserved seats and attested copies of her academic qualification, certificates starting from Matriculation latest by 31.01.2005. Respondent vide her letter dated 31.01.2005 sent attested copies of academic qualification certificates. In respect of OBC certificate she informed that the same has been misplaced and she be granted 15 days time for producing the same. Thereafter, respondent submitted OBC certificate dated 05.02.2005 issued by SDM, Seelampur, Delhi to DSSSB vide her letter dated 07.02.2005. The dossier of respondent containing caste certificate was sent by DSSSB to Education department vide their letter dated 09.03.2006. Education department issued ‘Offer of Appointment’ on 28.05.2006 to respondent giving her benefit of reservation/age. 3. It is alleged that during the course of scrutiny of documents/certificates submitted in the office of petitioner for verification, it was found that OBC certificate No. OBC/04/42/2749/31/1/2005/4620 dated 05.02.2005 was issued by SDM, Seelampur, Delhi after the closing date of submission of application form, i.e. 24.05.2004. Therefore the petitioner acting in terms of G.I., Department of Personnel and Training OM No. 36033/4/97-Estt.(Res.), dated 25.07.2003 cancelled the candidature of the respondent vide letter dated 19.10.2006 on the aforesaid ground. Aggrieved with the same, respondent filed OA No. 449/2007 before the Tribunal which was allowed vide impugned order dated 19.11.2007. The aforesaid impugned order is challenged by petitioner by filing the present petition. 4. Aggrieved with the same, respondent filed OA No. 449/2007 before the Tribunal which was allowed vide impugned order dated 19.11.2007. The aforesaid impugned order is challenged by petitioner by filing the present petition. 4. The case of the respondent is that she fulfilled all the eligibility conditions for the post of “Domestic Science Teacher”. It is contended that she fell under the category of OBC even prior to advertisement in question and continued thereafter. It is alleged that the respondent had also annexed an OBC certificate issued by Tehsildar Baraut, District Bagpat, UP dated 13.03.2001 alongwith the application form much before the closing date, i.e. on 18.05.2004. It is contended that acknowledgement slip issued to her also shows that her application form was received under the OBC category. It is also contended that in any event no cut-off date was mentioned in the advertisement for submission of OBC certificate. It is further contended that OBC certificate dated 05.02.2005 was furnished on 07.02.2005 as the same was demanded by petitioner after closing date vide their letter dated 24.01.2005. 5. Counsel for petitioner relying upon G.I., Deptt. of Personnel & Training, O.M. No. 36033/4/97-Estt. (Res.), dated 25.07.2003 has submitted that since the OBC certificate dated 05.02.2005 was issued subsequent to the date of closing of receipt of application forms, petitioners cancelled the candidature of respondent. Learned counsel has placed reliance on Clause 3 of the aforesaid OM. It is contended that impugned order is arbitrary, illegal and is ought to be set aside. 6. We have considered the submissions made. 7. There is no dispute about the fact that respondent belongs to OBC category. It is also not the case of the petitioner that she falls in creamy layer. It is also not in dispute that respondent submitted her application on 18.05.2004, i.e. before the closing date of receipt of application forms which was 24.05.2004. It is also not in dispute that after the closing date of receipt of application form i.e. 24.05.2004, petitioner asked the respondent vide its letter dated 24.01.2005 to furnish the attested copies of the relevant documents in support of claim of reservation duly attested by a Gazetted Officer/Notary Public latest by 31.01.2005. It is also not in dispute that after the closing date of receipt of application form i.e. 24.05.2004, petitioner asked the respondent vide its letter dated 24.01.2005 to furnish the attested copies of the relevant documents in support of claim of reservation duly attested by a Gazetted Officer/Notary Public latest by 31.01.2005. It is also not disputed that the respondent, vide her letter dated 31.01.2005 requested for 15 days time to furnish the same on the ground that she had lost original caste certificate and there is nothing on record to show that time sought by her was denied by petitioner. It is also admitted position that on 07.02.2005, respondent had furnished original OBC certificate issued by SDM, Seelampur, Delhi and thereafter the petitioner issued ‘Offer of Appointment’ vide letter dated 28.03.2006 to respondent. 8. We have also gone through the OM dated 25.07.2003 (supra). Clause 3 of the OM provides that appointing authority, before appointing a person seeking appointment on the basis of reservation of OBCs should verify the veracity of the community certificate submitted by the candidate and also the fact that he/she does not fall in creamy layer on the crucial date and the crucial date for this purpose may be treated as the closing date of receipt of application for the post except in cases where crucial date is fixed otherwise. The aforesaid clause nowhere specifies that caste certificate issued subsequent to the date of closing of receipt of application cannot be looked into. 9. The controversy between the parties can be examined from another angle also. As per the advertisement dated 30.04.2004, vacancies were reserved for candidates from SC/OBC category. In order to be considered for the post of “Domestic Science Teacher” reserved for OBC category, the requirement is that a person should have belonged to that category. In the present case, it is not disputed that respondent belongs to OBC category. The stand of respondent is that she received a letter dated 24.01.2005 from Deputy Secretary, DSSSB to furnish OBC certificate duly attested from Gazetted Officer/Notary Public and documents in support of educational qualifications by 31.01.2005. Respondent visited the office of Deputy Secretary with letter dated 31.01.2005 and requested 15 days time as her original OBC certificate dated 13.03.2001 was not traceable at that time. Respondent visited the office of Deputy Secretary with letter dated 31.01.2005 and requested 15 days time as her original OBC certificate dated 13.03.2001 was not traceable at that time. Thereafter she applied for the OBC certificate to the Government of NCT of Delhi and on 05.02.2005 SDM, Seelampur, Delhi had furnished OBC certificate to her which was sent by her to DSSSB on 07.02.2005. She further stated that she had annexed the OBC certificate dated 13.03.2001 with application form which was issued to her before marriage by Tehsildar Baraut, District Bagpat, UP. Respondents 1 and 2 in their reply before Tribunal have referred to the OBC certificate issued by Tehsildar Baraut, District Bagpat, UP. The Tribunal has also taken note of the same in the impugned order. The Tribunal has concluded that the OBC certificate dated 13.03.2001 issued by Tehsildar Baraut, District Bagpat, UP was submitted by respondent with the application form. The petitioner has not been able to show any reason to differ from the said finding of fact. Respondent has also annexed a copy of aforesaid certificate along with O.A. filed before Tribunal. The genuineness of the same is not challenged before Tribunal or before this Court. The aforesaid caste certificate is issued much prior to last date of application. It is not the case of the Government that the respondent falls in the creamy layer. 10. Considering the above facts and circumstances, no case for interference with the impugned order is made out. Present petition stands dismissed.