Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 880 (JHR)

Ved Prakash v. State of Jharkhand

2016-05-19

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2016
JUDGMENT : Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. Petitioner belongs to 'Sudhi' Caste falling under BC-II Category earlier. The caste 'Sudhi' was changed from BC-II Category to BC-I Category by Notification of the State Government issued by the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand on 18.12.2015. Petitioner had obtained the caste certificate of BC-II Category earlier, on the basis of which, he made an application on 21.12.2015 for admission in Post Graduate Medical Admission Test-2016 conducted by the Respondent No. 4 - Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board, Govt. of Jharkhand before the cut-off date prescribed for making such application i.e. 11.01.2016. 2. Respondent-Board issued an advertisement on 01.02.2016 to enable the candidates who had some complains relating to error in the admit card with regard to the name, father's name, category, date of birth, etc to be made by 09.02.2016. Petitioner appeared in the written exam as BC-II candidate on 07.02.2016 and made a request for change of his category to BC-I Category only on 09.03.2016. He also produced caste certificate of 'Sudhi' Caste BC-I Category issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Ramgarh on 14.03.2016. His request was declined by Annexure-8 letter dated 15.03.2016 issued by the Respondent No. 5 - Administrative Officer, Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board, Govt. of Jharkhand having been made beyond the cut-off date 09.02.2016. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has harped upon the condition contained in the advertisement inviting application dated 01.12.2015 bearing no. 99 (Annexure-1). The condition relating to reservation has been prescribed therein, as per which, for the selection of candidates for admission in Post Graduate Medical Degree/Diploma Courses, Reservation Policy / Rules of the Government of Jharkhand prevailing on the date of commencement of counselling will be applicable. Counselling in respect of the aforesaid admission has started sometime in this month i.e. May 2016, as per submission made by the counsel for the respondent-Board. Petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr., reported in 2016 (2) JCR 230 (SC) : 2016 (2) JBCJ 19 (SC). He submits that the benefit of reservation of BC-I Category, should not be denied to the petitioner in teeth of the Constitutional provisions and judgment also relied upon by the Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (Supra). He submits that the benefit of reservation of BC-I Category, should not be denied to the petitioner in teeth of the Constitutional provisions and judgment also relied upon by the Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (Supra). It is not a case where petitioner on his own sought to effect change in his caste. The change in his caste has been occasioned on account of Notification of the State Government itself issued on 18.12.2015, of which petitioner only after sometime came to know and obtained BC-I Caste certificate. Therefore, Insistence on the cut-off date should not be imposed by the respondent-Board. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-Board has filed the counter-affidavit. Learned counsel Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta submits that the petitioner did not comply with the deadlines i.e. 09.02.2016 for seeking any such correction. The judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (Supra) is in respect of appointment, whereas the present matter relates to admission to PG Courses. Counselling of first phase is already over and second phase of counselling would be held tomorrow i.e. 20.05.2016. 5. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties in the light of the relevant material facts pleaded and judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (Supra), this Court is of the view that the respondent-Board should reconsider the request of the petitioner in the light of the provisions contained in the advertisement dated 01.12.2015, referred to herein-above, as also ratio rendered in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (Supra). Let such reconsideration be made within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Needless to say, on such reconsideration if the respondent allow change of caste of the petitioner to BC-I Category, petitioner's case in the said category should be open for consideration in the future counselling and on the availability of vacancies thereafter. 6. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Petition disposed of.