Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Competent Authority Entrance ... vs Sovia Anand And Anr) Considered As To ... on 28 April, 2016
Bench: Dhiraj Singh Thakur, B.S.Walia
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU LPAOW No. 27 OF 1994 1 Competent Authority Entrance Examinations J&K Jammu through Sh. B.A Shah Registrar Competent Authority. 2. Controller of Examinations Competent Authority Entrance Examinations J&K Jammu,, New Secretariat Jammu. Petitioners 1. Mahesh Kumar Raina S/O Sh. Jia Lal Raina R/O Manwa Tehsil Bhaderwah District Doda. 2. State of J&K through Chief Secretary J&K Jammu Respondent !Mr. D.C.Raina Advocate General with M/s Ravinder Gupta AAG & Amit Gupta Dy.AG ^None Honble Mr. Justice N. Paul Vasanthakumar, Chief Justice Honble Mr. Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur, Judge Honble Mr. Justice B.S.Walia, Judge. Date: 28.04.2016 :J U D G M E N T :
N.Paul Vasanthakumar, CJ
1. A Division Bench of this Court by order dated 15.03.1994 while admitting the appeal and noticing the sustainability of the We are prima facie in agreement with the learned Single Judge that a candidate, who has acted diligently and done all that w
2. Consequent to the said reference made, a Full Bench was initially constituted by the Chief Justice on 25.04.1994. The said
3. On 30.04.1994, the Chief Justice constituted another Full Bench. Thereafter, the matter was listed after more than six yea
4. The case filed by the 1st respondent/writ petitioner before the Writ Court was seeking admission to MBBS/BDS Course for ac been considered in reserved category, the 1st respondent filed writ petition contending that the appellants are under legal o
5. In the objections filed by the appellants before the Writ Court it was stated that the 1st respondent (writ petitioner) wa The notification also required the production of certificate along with the application form. It is also mentioned in the obj
6. The Writ Court considered the said contentions and noticed that the 1st respondent was diligently following his case for g process, he got involved and he having sent the certificate before finalizing the selection, he could not be blamed as equita
7. The order of the Writ Court was not stayed during the pendency of this L.P. appeal as the Division Bench was prima facie o
8. As no one has chosen to appear for the 1st respondent, It is not known as to whether the 1st respondent was given admissio
9. In the application form submitted by the 1st respondent he has filled the relevant column stating as to whether he claims has sent it to the competent authority before the selection, has to be treated as a valid ground to claim admission under the
10. It is not in dispute that on the date when the application was submitted by the respondent he was residing in a backward
11. The above undisputed facts clearly reveal that the 1st respondent was not at all at fault and his status as belonging to was already considered by Honble the Supreme Court in the decision reported in AIR 2004 SC 5043 (Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, 7. The general rule is that while applying for any course of study or a post, a person must possess the eligibility qualific
12. The filing of proof for claiming the benefit of reservation, and if the claim is made and proof is produced before finali II under Wards Category, who failed to get the service certificate of his father in time and produced it before finalizing th
13. Non production of experience certificate along with the application form of the experience which was gained prior to the
14. Identical issue arose before Honble the Supreme Court in the decision reported in AIR 2016 SC 1098 (Ram Kumar Gijroya v. question arose was as to whether a candidate who appears in an examination under OBC category and submits the OBC certificate
15. A Division Bench of this Court in LPA(OW) No. 51 of 2015 by judgment dated 02.03.2016 (J&K Board of Professinal 12 Entrance Examinations vs. Sovia Anand and anr) considered as to whether though belonging to the Actual Line of Control (ALC)
16. Thus the reference made before this Full Bench is answered in the following manner:-
A candidate must possess the eligibility on the cutoff date and if claims that he/she belongs to a particular category in the application form and unable to produce the proof/certificate before the cutoff date inspite of his/her best efforts, the said
16. Consequent to our above referred answer to the issue raised, the judgment rendered by the Division Bench in LPA No. 261/1 (N. Paul Vasanthakumar) Chief Justice (Dhiraj Singh Thakur) Judge (B.S.Walia) Judge Jammu, 28.04.2016 Anil Raina Secy.