Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Union Public Service Commission vs Gaurav Singh on 18 May, 2022
Bench: Indira Banerjee, C.T. Ravikumar
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.426 of 2021)
UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION … Appellant(s)
VERSUS
GAURAV SINGH & ORS. … Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
This appeal is against a judgment and order dated 12.11.2020 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi allowing the writ petition being WP (C) No.8938 of 2020 filed by the respondents-writ petitioners. The writ petition was filed seeking the following reliefs :
“(a) Issue a writ of mandamus thereby directing the Respondents to permit the Petitioners to appear for their interview and consider their candidature in Economically Weaker Section Category;
(b) Direct the Respondent authorities to allow the Petitioners to submit their corrected EWS certificates within a span of 6 weeks from the date of their interview.
(c) Issue or pass any writ, direction or order, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper Signature Not Verified under the facts and circumstances of the case.” Digitally signed by GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA Date: 2022.05.19 16:31:17 IST Reason: The respondents-writ petitioners who were residents of different districts of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, applied in response to an advertisement issued by the appellant-Union Public Service 2 Commission dated 24.04.2019 inviting applications for the Central Armed Police Forces Examination, 2019. The respondents-writ petitioners claimed benefit of reservation for the Ecomonically Weaker Sections (EWS). In the writ petition filed in the High Court, it was contended that even though the respondent writ petitioners had submitted income and asset certificates and had clarified in the written examination and in the Physical Standard Test and/or Physical Efficiency Test and also the Medical Standard Test, they were not called for interview as candidates belonging to the EWS category but as general category candidates. The writ petitioners contended that the income and asset certificates submitted by them had wrongfully been rejected by the appellant-
Union Public Service Commission.
By a notification bearing No. 36039/1/2019-E dated 31.01.2019, the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training laid down the criteria and reservation for the EWS. The said notification provides :
“4. CRITERIA OF INCOME & ASSETS 4.1 Persons who are not covered under the scheme of reservation for SCs, STs, and OBCs and whose family has gross annual income below Rs. 8.00 lakh (Rupees eight lakh only) are to be identified as EWSs for benefit of reservation.
Income shall also include income from all sources i.e. salary, agriculture, business, profession, etc. For the financial year prior to the year of application.
Also persons whose family owns or possesses any of the following assets shall be excluded from being identified as EWS, irrespective of the family income :-
3
i. 5 acres of agricultural land and above;
ii. Residential flat of 1000 sq. ft. And above;
iii.Residential plot of 100 sq. Yards and above in notified municipalities;
iv. Residential plot of 200 sq. Yards and above in areas other than the notified municipalities.
4.2 The property held by a “Family” in different locations or different places/cities would be clubbed while applying the land or property holding test to determine EWS status.
4.3 The term “Family” for this purpose will include the person who seeks benefit of reservation, his/her parents and siblings below the age of 18 years as also his/her spouse and children below the age of 18 years.
5. INCOME AND ASSET CERTIFICATE ISSUING AUTHORITY AND VERIFICATION OF CERTIFICATE 5.1 The benefit of reservation under EWS can be availed upon production of an Income and Asset Certificate issued by a Competent Authority. The Income and Asset Certificate issued by any one of the following authorities in the prescribed format as given in Annexure-I shall only be accepted as proof of candidate’s claim as belonging to EWS :-
(i) District Magistrate/Additional District Magistrate/Collector/Deputy Commissioner/Additional Deputy Commissioner/1st Class Stipendary Magistrate/Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Taluka Magistrate/Executive Magistrate/Extra Assistant Commissioner
(ii) Chief Presidency Magistrate/Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate/Presidency Magistrate
(iii) Revenue Officer not below the rank of Tehsildar and
(iv) Sub-Divisional Officer or the area where the candidate and/or his family normally resides.
5.2 The Officer who issues the certificate would 4 do the same after carefully verifying all relevant documents following due process as prescribed by the respective State/UT. 5.3 The crucial date for submitting income and asset certificate by the candidate may be treated as the date for receipt of application for the post, except in cases where crucial date is fixed otherwise.
5.4 The appointing authorities should in the offer of apppointment to the candidates claiming to be belonging to EWS, include the following clause :-
“The appointment is provisional and is subject to the Income and asset certificate being verified through the proper channels and if the verification reveals that the claim to belong to EWS is fake/false the services will be terminated forthwith without assigining any further reasons and without prejudice to such further action as may be taken under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code for production of fake/false certificate” 5.5 Instructions referred to above should be strictly followed so that it may not be possible for an unscrupulous person to secure employment on the basis of a false claim and if any person gets an appointment on the basis of such false claim, her/his services shall be terminated invoking the conditions contained in the offer of appointment.” By a notification dated 24.04.2019, the Union Public Service Commission invited applications for recruitment to the post of Assistant Commandant (Group A) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF), Border Security Force (BSF), Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) and Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB). The last date for submission of applications was 20.05.2019.
On diverse dates between 18.12.2019 and 28.12.2019, the different respondents-writ petitioners were called for the Physical 5 Standard Test/Physical Efficiency Test and Medical Standard Test. In October 2020, the respondents-writ petitioners were issued email messages stating that their candidature as EWS candidates has been cancelled by reason of errors in their income and asset certificates. The respondents-writ petitioners were permitted to appear for interview but in the general category.
Being aggrieved, the respondents-writ petitioners filed the writ petition being WP (C) No. 8938 of 2020 in the High Court of Delhi. The appellant has challenged the impugned judgment and order whereby the said writ petition has been allowed. The High Court found that the respondents-writ petitioners fulfill the criteria for reservation for the EWS.
Referring to the advertisement/notification dated 24.04.2019, the High Court found that the criteria in the OM dated 31.01.2019 had been incorporated in the selection process. In other words, the certificate would have to be issued as per the prescribed procedure by the prescribed authority in the format given in the OM. The High Court noted that the income and asset certificate had to be dated earlier than 01.08.2019. this was a one time relaxation since reservation for EWS category was made by a recent notification. In this case, as recorded by the High Court, the appellant-Union Public Service Commission rejected the certificates on account of discrepancies. To be specific, the certificates relate to the financial year 2019-2020 while they should have been for the financial year 2018-2019. Furthermore, the certificates were of a date subsequent to the last date specified. 6
In the case of Respondent-Writ Petitioner No.3, the certificate which was initially questioned as having been issued by an authority not competent has been accepted but in the other cases, it is contended that the certificates are of a subsequent date and they pertain to the subsequent financial year. The certificate of writ-petitioner No.1 was also accepted as there was no discrepancy in either the date of issuance or the year. It was just that the seal had been stamped without name of the officer concerned and that was accepted as an error not attributable to the candidate concerned.
The High Court has directed the appellants to allow the writ petitioners to appear in the interview considering them as candidates in the category of EWS.
In our considered opinion, the High Court fell in error in directing that all the writ petitioners be treated as EWS candidates. Even though the writ petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 and 4 were ineligible in terms of the notification in that they have filed certificates issued subsequent to the last date and for the later financial year.
The appeal is allowed in part and the order is set aside insofar it relates to the respondent-Writ Petitioner No.2 and respondent-Writ Petitioner No.4.
It is made clear that the respondent-Writ Petitioner No.1 and the respondent-Writ Petitioner No.3 shall be treated as EWS 7 candidates.
The rejection of candidates in the facts of the instances case cannot be said to be whimsical.
………………………………………………………,J.
(Indira Banerjee) ………………………………………………………,J.
(C.T. Ravikumar) New Delhi;
May 18, 2020.
8
ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.8 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 426/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-11-2020 in WPC No. 8938/2020 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi) UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Petitioner(s) VERSUS GAURAV SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 2268/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 41491/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 2269/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 18-05-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Jayant K. Sud, ASG Mr. Tejas Patel, Adv.
Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv.
Mr. s.K. Singhania, Adv.
Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar sharma, Adv.
Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Adv.
Mr. Vardhman Kaushik , AOR Mr. dhruv Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Manoj Joshi, Adv.
Mr. anand Singh, Adv.
Mr. Prafful Saini, Adv.
Mr. Nishant Gautam, Adv.
Mr. B. Purushottama Reddy, Adv.
Ms. Lalitha Kaushik, Adv.
Ms. Alaisha Asher, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. T. R. B. Sivakumar, AOR Mrs. Tanuj Bagga Sharma, AOR 9 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R (GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)