Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1387 (ALL)

Anubhav Verma v. Staff Selection Commission Lodhi Road N. Delhi

2016-04-13

SATYENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, VIJAY LAXMI

body2016
JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 31.3.2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow (for short "the Tribunal"). 3. Submission of counsel for the petitioner is that judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and another, Civil Appeal No.1692 of 2016 and other connected mattes, decided on 24.2.2016, has not been considered by the competent authority and in ignorance of that judgment, the Tribunal has rendered the judgment. He has placed reliance on the said judgment and submits that benefit of the said judgment ought to have been given to the petitioner. 4. The condition enumerated in paragraph-14 of the aforesaid judgment itself goes to indicate that caste certificate could have been submitted up to the date of publication of the provisional selection list whereas the condition enumerated in the present case is altogether different and caste certificate was required to be submitted between a particular period and that too, issued by the Central Government, but neither of the conditions were fulfilled by the petitioner. The Tribunal while considering the question recorded the following finding: - "The case law so cited by the applicant is in respect of when a candidate fails to submit any caste certificate and he submits the same after the cut off date and in the present case, the Caste Certificate is required to be submitted which is issued between particular period and it is categorically indicated in the advertisement that the certificate issued between the particular period only will be accepted. The certificate so submitted by the applicant was issued by incompetent authority and subsequent certificate is submitted is issued by authority beyond cut off date. As such, I am not inclined to pass any interim order in this case." 5. We have gone through the finding recorded by the Tribunal and we do not find any illegality in the same. The writ petition is devoid of merit. It is accordingly dismissed.