Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 335 (JK)

Narinder Paul Choudhary v. State

2010-06-03

J.P.SINGH

body2010
1. Petitioner had applied seeking consideration for selection as Draftsman(Civil) against one of the posts reserved for candidates belonging to the reserved category of Residents of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control pursuant to Advertisement Notice No.7 of 2005 dated 20.11.2005 issued by the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board. He was denied consideration by the Board under the reserved category, on the ground that he had not annexed requisite certificate of being a member of Socially and Economically Backward Class falling under the Category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control along with his Application Form. 2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner did not possess requisite Certificate indicating him to be the resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control, when he had applied seeking consideration for selection against the posts reserved for Socially and Educationally Backward Class. He had rather applied for issuance of such Certificate after the cut off date as indicated in Notification No.7 of 2005. The Certificate, for which he had applied on 29.12.2005, was issued to him on 31.05.2006. 3. The Certificate issued by the Tehsildar, Nowshera, certifies him a member of the Socially and Educationally Backward Class falling under the Category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control. 4. According to the Board, the petitioner was not entitled to consideration for selection against the posts reserved for those belonging to the Reserved Category, because he was not entitled to consideration for selection for his not possessing requisite Certificate of belonging to the category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control, on the cut off date, which was one of the essential eligibility conditions for the candidates seeking consideration for selection against the posts reserved for the categories. 5. There is no dispute between the parties over the petitioners status as a member of the Socially and Educationally Backward Class falling under the category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control, which even otherwise stands certified by Tehsildar, Nowshera, the Competent Authority, empowered to issue such Certificate. 6. 5. There is no dispute between the parties over the petitioners status as a member of the Socially and Educationally Backward Class falling under the category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control, which even otherwise stands certified by Tehsildar, Nowshera, the Competent Authority, empowered to issue such Certificate. 6. All that, therefore, needs to be considered for determination is as to whether absence of requisite Certificate of petitioners belonging to the Socially and Educationally Backward Class, on the cut off date, disentitles him to seek consideration for selection against the posts reserved for the category, despite Competent Authoritys certification that he belonged to the Reserved Category, though later, but during the currency of the selection process. 7. The question is no longer res integra and stands concluded by various judgments of this Court. The law laid down by this Court in Tasneem Kounsar and ors. v. State and ors. reported as 2003(1) SLJ 155 and Surjeet Singh Bali v. State of J&K and ors. reported as 2007(1)SLJ 18, supports the petitioners learned counsels contention that the petitioner, a member of the Socially and Educationally Backward Class of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control, could not be denied consideration, merely because he did not possess requisite Certificate on the cut off date, about his status as a member of the reserved category, in that, he had not acquired such status after the cut off date, which may deprive him of the right to consideration for selection. 8. As the Board was conscious of the petitioners status as that of a member of Socially and Educationally Backward Class falling under the category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control so it was required to consider him against the posts reserved for the category. Its omission to consider the petitioners case only because he did not possess requisite Certificate of his status on the cut off date, cannot thus be justified. 9. Its omission to consider the petitioners case only because he did not possess requisite Certificate of his status on the cut off date, cannot thus be justified. 9. The Board has, therefore, erred in refusing consideration to the petitioner for selection against one of the posts reserved for members of Socially and Educationally Backward Class under the category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control on the ground of his not possessing the Certificate on the cut off date indicated in the Notification, ignoring his status as a member of Socially and Educationally Backward Class under the category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control which stood certified before the finalization of the selection. 10. Petitioner, having been certified to be a member of Socially and Educationally Backward Class under the category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control before the completion of the selection process, was thus entitled to consideration against the posts reserved for ALC category. 11. A direction, therefore, needs to be issued to the respondent-Board to consider the petitioner for selection against the posts reserved for person belonging to the ALC category. This Petition, therefore, succeeds and is allowed. 12. A direction shall, accordingly, issue to the Board to consider the petitioner for selection against the post of Draftsman (Civil) under the reserved category of Resident of Area adjoining Line of Actual Control, under Rules. The Board shall complete this exercise within a period of six weeks.