Delhi High Court
Vijay Nath Yadav vs Union Of India & Ors. on 19 December, 2014
Author: Najmi Waziri
Bench: Kailash Gambhir, Najmi Waziri
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 19.12.2014
+ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012
VIJAY NATH YADAV ...... Petitioner
Through: Mr. U. Srivastava, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J. (Oral)
1. In this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the orders dated 1.3.2012 & 23.3.2012, whereby his candidature for the post of Sub-Inspector in BSF was cancelled and was discharged from service on the ground that he was overage for the said post as on the cut off date of 04.07.2008.
2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was a Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). He joined the Special Protection Group (Cabinet Secretariat) as an SA on deputation from 17.4.2006 and was also extended the benefits of ACP w.e.f. 26.3.2008. While on deputation, he took the examination for the post _______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 1 of 8 of Sub-Inspector in Central Police Organizations (CPOs), 2008, conducted by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC). He was given an offer of appointment to the BSF in April, 2010 and was required to report to the BSF Academy, Tekanpur, Gwalior, M.P. on 24.5.2010 for undergoing the basic training. However, subsequently it was discovered that he was overage for the said post. As per Rules, the age of entry to the post of Sub-Inspectors in the BSF for persons serving in Central Police Organisations is 20-25 years, which is relaxed by 5 years for Central Govt. employees and by another three years for persons belonging to the OBC category. Therefore, the maximum age for a person of the OBC category was 33 years whereas the petitioner an OBC candidate was 35 years, 11 months 14 days old as on the cut off date of 4.7.2008. Accordingly, his candidature was rejected.
3. The petitioner argues that the age of relaxation for CPOs is 43 years.
He relies upon clause 4(D) of the Advertisement dated 9.11.2008 on the basis of which the examination for the post of Sub-Inspectors was conducted. The said clause reads as under:
"4(D). (i) Age relaxation to Central Government Civilian Employees:
_______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 2 of 8 Relaxation in upper age limit by 5 years is permissible to Central Government Civilian Employees who have rendered not less than 3 years continuous service and regular service as on 4.7.2008, which is as follows:
(ii) Age Relaxation to Departmental Candidates:
Relaxation in age limits is also admissible to Departmental Candidates who have rendered not less than 3 years of continuous and regular service as on 4.7.2008 which is as follows:
(a) For SIs in ITBP and CRPF: Upto the age of 40 years (45 years for S.C./S.T. and 43 years for OBCs).
(b) For SIs in CISF: Upto the age of 35 years (40 years for SC/ST and 38 years for OBCs).
(c) For SIs in BSF & SSB: 5 years age relaxation is available to all Central Government Civilian Servants irrespective of the Department in which they are working and there is no separate age relaxation for Departmental candidates of BSF and SSB.
Note: Departmental candidates applying under Sub paras a, b & c of para 4(D) (ii) as well as Central Government Civilian employees seeking age relaxation under Para 4(D)(i) above, would be required to submit a certificate by their office indicating the length of service rendered by them at the time of applying for the Examination to enable the Commission to decide their eligibility."
4. However, the aforesaid clause would show that the age relaxation was for a candidate of the Central Police Organization, i.e. a departmental candidate who had sought appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector in the same organization. Therefore, for a Sub- Inspector in ITBP or CRPF, the age of relaxation would be 43 years _______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 3 of 8 for OBCs whereas it would be 38 years for a person in CISF. The petitioner was a departmental candidate of the ITBP whereas he had sought appointment in CISF.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent has produced a chart to show as to how the aforesaid clause 4 has been worked out with respect to the petitioner. The same is reproduced hereinunder:
S.No. Details Date
1. Date of birth of the candidate, Vijay Nath 21.07.1972 Yadav
2. Working as Constable in the CISF
3. Cut off date/closing date of receipt of 4.7.2008 applications
4. Upper age limit relaxable by 5 years to Central Government Civilian Employees and further 3 years relaxable to OBC candidate.
Thus, altogether he was entitled to get age relaxation up to age of 33 years (25+5+3) for other than CISF, i.e. CRPF, BSF, ITBP & SSB and 38 years (35+3) as departmental + OBC candidate for CISF as per Part II of Notice.
5. Age as on cut off date 35 years 11 months 14 days
6. Age relaxation sought: as departmental candidate + OBC category - he, being employee of CISF, was entitled to be treated as departmental candidate against CISF vacancies only, - he was not entitled to get age relaxation as departmental candidate against vacancies of CRPF, BSF, ITBP & SSB - he was entitled to be treated as Central Government Civilian Employee against vacancies of aforesaid CPOs.
8. Under Column 19 of the application his B, C, A, D, E _______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 4 of 8 preferences for Organization/Service: 1st,2nd,3rd,4th,5th B-CISF, C-CRPF, A-BSF, D-ITBP and E-
SSB
9. For preference B(CISF) & C (CRPF), he scored less than cut off marks prescribed for the two preferences
10. For preference A (BSF), D (ITBP) & E (SSB) he was overage Order of Eligible in Age preferences B-CISF 35+3 (Departmental OBC)=38 years Yes C-CRPF 25+5+3(Maximum+CGCE+OBC)=33 years No A-BSF 25+5+3(Maximum+CGCE+OBC)=33 years No D-ITBP 25+5+3(Maximum+CGCE+OBC)=33 years No E-SSB 25+5+3(Maximum+CGCE+OBC)=33 years No
6. From the preceding discussion it is evident that the benefit of 38 years for appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector in the BSF would not be available to the petitioner because he was a CISF candidate. For a CISF and ITBP OBC category candidate the relaxable age is 43 years, if an appointment was sought within those forces. However, the appointment was sought in the BSF, where the maximum relaxable age for a non-BSF OBC candidate was 33 years only. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be granted the benefit of the higher age relaxation.
7. We note that the petitioner had listed his preferences for different CPOs (Civil Police Organization). He did not qualify for his first two preferences i.e. the CISF and the CRPF since he was low in the _______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 5 of 8 order of merit. However, in April, 2010, he was allocated to the BSF by the respondents in order of merit. An order was issued by the Special Protection Group (SPG) where he was then serving, putting him at the disposal of his parent department i.e. the CISF with effect from 1st December, 2011 for duty and further orders. The CISF accepted his technical resignation of 22nd May, 2010 and on the 24th of that month, he was enrolled with the BSF with his past service benefits. He had almost completed the basic training when on 8th April, 2011 he was verbally stopped from continuing it. He made representations against the said stopping of training, which finally resulted in cancellation of his candidature by the Staff Selection Commission on 1.3.2012. This Court notes that the petitioner did not conceal his age from the Staff Selection Commission for the Central Police Organization Examination, 2008 for recruitment of Sub- Inspector. The examination form was filled up as per the format. His age was disclosed as it was without concealing anything relevant. A separate calculation was not required to be provided by the candidate, in accordance with the preferences given for allocation of the different CPOs; which would have been in order of merit. If the petitioner had scored the requisite marks for the CISF or the CRPF, _______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 6 of 8 he would have got into either of the services because he met the age criteria for those forces. However, he qualified for the BSF as per his merit. Subsequently he was found to be disqualified because of being overage. This calculation of overage was done at a much later stage by the Staff Selection Commission i.e. almost one year after he had been issued an offer of appointment for the BSF, and was placed on probation period of two years from that date till the impugned order of 9.4.2011. The petitioner was regarded and conducted himself as a Sub-Inspector in the BSF. It was a paradigm shift in his personal, family and social status, from his previous station in life as that of a constable. The shock and mental agony which the petitioner would have undergone is understandable and cannot be condoned when the basic training was almost completed, he was suddenly stopped from continuing further. The lack of diligence in processing the petitioner's case is entirely the fault of the Staff Selection Commission/respondent No.2; such action cannot be condoned because it resulted in the present litigation, involving unnecessary costs and agony to the petitioner. He would need to be compensated for the same.
8. In the circumstances, while the petitioner would not be permitted to _______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 7 of 8 continue in service in the BSF because he did not meet the age criteria, he would nonetheless be entitled to costs for these proceedings which are fixed at Rs.75,000/- to be paid by the Staff Selection Commission within four weeks from today. The petitioner shall be accepted back into service by the CISF treating his technical resignation as non est because his subsequent employment in the BSF has been found to be erroneous. The petitioner cannot be rendered remediless and out of service. His period of service with the BSF would be treated as a continuance in service with the CISF from the date prior to the acceptance/issuance of the technical resignation. The petition is disposed off in the above terms.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J.
DECEMBER 19, 2014 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. b'nesh
_______________________________________________________________________ WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 Page 8 of 8