Trailukya Kumar Nath v. The Union of India and 7 Ors

ORDER Date : 12-02-2024 Heard Mr. R Mazumder learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B Sharma learned CGC. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner Page No.# 3/4 participated in the selection process initiated by the respondent authorities for filing up the post of Constable/Driver in Central Reserve Police Force pursuant to an advertisement dated 22.01.2016. The petitioner belongs to OBC category and the last selected person in the OBC category has obtained less mark than the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner ought to have been selected for the post earmarked for the OBC category. The respondent has taken a specific stand that the petitioner did not submit a valid OBC certificate in proper format while making the application for selection pursuant to the advertisement dated

22.01.2016. Though the petitioner had also failed to produce such a certificate at the stage of document verification, the petitioner claims that he had sent an acceptable and due OBC certificate through post. However, the respondents have denied receipt of any such certificate and accordingly contends that in view of non availability of OBC certificate, the petitioner was not considered against OBC category and accordingly, he was not offered appointment. There is no dispute that the OBC certificate annexed along with the application was not in the format as prescribed under the advertisement and there is also no dispute that the petitioner could not produce the certificate in proper format during the course of verification of record. In the aforesaid backdrop, this court cannot find fault with the respondent authorities and cannot conclude the respondent authorities had discriminated the petitioner inasmuch as the petitioner cannot be granted benefit of higher marks when he has failed to Page No.# 4/4 submit the OBC certificate at appropriate time and stage in terms of the prescription of the advertisement. In view of the aforesaid, this court finds no merit in this writ petition and accordingly the same stands dismissed. Parties to bear their own cost.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010011272017 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/478/2017o TRAILUKYAoKUMARoNATHo ROLLoNO.o21012000501,oS/O.oDINAoBANDHUoNATH,oR/O.oVILL.oWABORI,o MIKIRBHETA,oMORIGAON,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoando7oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoSECRETARY,oMINISTRYoOFoHOMEoAFFAIRS,oNEWoDELHI. 2:THEoDIRECTORoGENERAL oCENTRALoRESERVEoPOLICEoFORCE oCENTRALoGOVERNMENToOFFICEoCOMPLEX oNEWoDELHI. 3:THEoINSPECTORoGENERALoOFoPOLICE oNORTHoEASToSECTOR oCENTRALoRESERVEoPOLICEoFORCE oSHILLONG oSTONEYoBISHOPoROAD oSHILLONG oMEGHALAYA oPIN.o793001. 4:THEoDEPUTYoINSPECTORoGENERALoOFoPOLICE oADM oNORTHoEASToSECTOR oCENTRALoRESERVEoPOLICEoFORCE oSHILLONG oSTONEYoBISHOPoROAD oSHILLONG oMEGHALAYA oPIN.o793001. 5:THEoDEPUTYoINSPECTORoGENERALoOFoPOLICE Page No.# 2/4 CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE GROUP CENTRE KHATKHATI KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN. 781023. 6:SRI KAMAL KRISHNA BARMAN S/O. LAL MOHAN BARMAN ROLL. NO. 21012000422. 7:LUHIT BORA S/O. DWIJEN BORA ROLL NO. 21012000500. 8:SHYAM CHANDRA MUTUA S/O. KULA CHANDRA SINGHA ROLL NO. 21012000642. COPY TO BE SERVED TO THE PRIVATE RESPONDENT NO. 6 7 AND 8 THROUGH THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ADM NORTH EAST SECTOR CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE SHILLONG STONEY BISHOP ROAD SHILLONG MEGHALAYA PIN. 793001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.R MAZUMDAR Advocate for the Respondent : MS.B SARMA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY