PANKAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri V.P. Varshneya appearing for the respondent no.3 (the Public Service Commission, U.P., hereinafter referred to as the Commission) and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent nos.1 and 2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being decided finally, at the admission stage itself.

(2.) Facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the petitioner, pursuant to an Advertisement No.6/2011-12 dated 17.03.2012, inviting applications for filling up several categories of posts in different departments of the State as well as posts of Lecturer in Government Polytechnics, applied for consideration for the post of Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering, under the category of Other Backward Classes. On screening, the petitioner was found successful and was called for interview before the Commission on 20.11.2012. On the date of the interview, an undertaking was obtained from the petitioner that he would submit certificate of his belonging to Other Backward Class on, or before, 11.12.2012. This undertaking was required as there was an objection with regards to Other Backward Class Certificate earlier provided by the petitioner. The petitioner, consequently, obtained a fresh certificate of his belonging to Other Backward Class and submitted the same before the Commission within the stipulated period. However, again objection was raised with regards to the certificate on the ground that it was not in consonance with a Government Order dated 02.07.1997. As a result, the petitioner obtained yet another certificate dated 11.01.2013. In the meantime, the result of the selection was published by the Commission on 04.01.2013 and the petitioner was placed at Sl. No.4 in the select list. However, against the name of the petitioner, in the select list, it was marked "provisional". To delete the entry of "provisional" against his name, the petitioner represented to the Commission vide representation dated 13.05.2013. The petitioner, thereafter, obtained certain information from the Commission under the Right to Information Act, which was supplied to the petitioner under office order dated 03.06.2013. The information reveals that as the petitioner had not deposited the certificate of his belonging to Other Backward Class, within 21 days from the date of the interview, his candidature has been canceled by the Commission.

(3.) Aggrieved by the cancellation of his candidature, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition on the ground that from the information received under the Right to Information Act it is clear that the petitioner was placed in the select list by treating him to be a candidate belonging to the unreserved category, therefore, even if the petitioner had failed to provide the certificate of his belonging to Other Backward Class, within the period provided in the undertaking, the Commission could not have canceled his candidature and, in fact, ought to have considered his candidature under the unreserved category.