Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 314 (UTT)

Hem Chandra Pandey v. State of Uttarakhand

2024-05-07

PANKAJ PUROHIT

body2024
JUDGMENT : PANKAJ PUROHIT, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.01.2023, passed by respondent no. 2, annexure-1 to the writ petition, whereby the candidature of the petitioner was rejected by the respondent-Commission for the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade, English as the petitioner was not having a valid certificate of his category i.e. EWS Category which was issued after the last date of submission of application form i.e. 25.03.2021. 3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner submitted his application form for the post of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade, English in EWS Category pursuant to the advertisement dated 13.10.2020. While submitting his candidature as EWS candidate, petitioner applied under the EWS Category for the said post. Undisputedly, the petitioner participated in the written examination and was selected and called for document verification. During the course of the document verification, it was found that EWS Certificate issued after the last date of submission of application form i.e. 25.03.2021 was not found credible and accordingly, the candidature of the petitioner was rejected. Petitioner feeling aggrieved by the order impugned is before this Court by way of filing the present writ petition. 4. Petitioner contended before this Court that the EWS Category Certificate was issued to the petitioner and the same was valid till 31.03.2021. The respondent-Commission has wrongly taken the date of validity written in the EWS Certificate as 31.03.2021 as the date of issuance, rather the certificate does not contain the date of its issuance. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent-Commission and in the counter affidavit, the stand taken by the Commission while rejecting the candidature of the petitioner has been reiterated. 6. The State/respondent no. 3 has filed its counter affidavit and in Para 8 of the counter affidavit, this fact has been clarified vividly by respondent no. 3 that the certificate was issued to the petitioner on 08.07.2020. In support of the contention raised by respondent no. 3, the Tehsildar, a statement of the Register maintained in the Office of Tehsildar is annexed wherein the name of the petitioner found place at Serial No. 32 of 2020. A reference may be had from annexure-CA2 to the counter affidavit filed by the Tehsildar. In the Annexure-CA2, the date of issuance of EWS Certificate is mentioned which is 08.07.2020. 7. A reference may be had from annexure-CA2 to the counter affidavit filed by the Tehsildar. In the Annexure-CA2, the date of issuance of EWS Certificate is mentioned which is 08.07.2020. 7. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent-Commission has wrongly passed the order whereby the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected as the date which has been taken by the Commission as the date of issuance of the certificate was a date to which date the certificate was valid. The Tehsildar who issued the certificate has filed a counter affidavit and in counter affidavit, it has been submitted with the strength of the document annexed, a statement of the Register maintained in the Office of Tehsildar, that the EWS Certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner on 08.07.2020. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Commission stated that in the online application, the petitioner has himself given the date of issuance of the EWS Certificate as 16.06.2020, therefore, now it cannot be believed that the certificate was issued on 08.07.2020. 9. Having heard the rival submission made by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record carefully, I find force in the contention made by learned counsel for the petitioner which is supported by the respondent no. 3 by filing the counter affidavit. The certificate which has been issued to the petitioner is annexed by the petitioner as annexure-7 to the writ petition and from the very perusal of the certificate, it is reflected that the same has been valid up to 31.03.2021. The respondent-Commission has wrongly taken that date as the date of issuance of the certificate. Annexure CA2 makes it abundantly clear that the EWS Certificate was issued in favour of petitioner on 08.07.2020. It would have been a better case in favour of the respondent-Commission had it come with a case that the certificate was issued as per the contention of the petitioner on 16.06.2020, but this is not a case of the respondent-Commission. It would be pertinent to mention at this stage that Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has kept one seat of Assistant Teacher (English) vacant for the petitioner vide order dated 25.02.2023. 10. Accordingly, the order dated 24.01.2023, passed by respondent no. 2, annexure-1 to the writ petition cannot sustain and the same is liable to be quashed. The writ petition is allowed. 10. Accordingly, the order dated 24.01.2023, passed by respondent no. 2, annexure-1 to the writ petition cannot sustain and the same is liable to be quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Hence, a writ of certiorari is issued and the order dated 24.01.2023 passed by respondent-Commission whereby the candidature of the petitioner is rejected is hereby quashed. A mandamus is issued to the respondent-Commission to proceed further in accordance with law after giving the benefit of EWS reservation to the petitioner and to recommend his name for appointment. 11. No order as to costs. 12. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.