SURINDER KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner applied for the post of Constable (General Duty) in the Central Industrial Security Forces (CISF) in the reserve category of Other Backward Classes (OBC) responding to an advertisement issued on 05.02.2011 jointly by Central Police Organizations for recruitment of Constables in BSF, CRPF, CISF and SSB. The petitioner applied for the post. He was called for the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) and Physical Standard Test (PST) in May 2011. He qualified both the tests. He was issued Admission Certificate to appear for the written test on 05.06.2011. He qualified the written test and the medical examination as well in July 2011. The result of the selection was published in November 2011. The petitioner's name figured in the selection list at Sr. No. 589 issued roll number-wise. The final result was published in February 2012. The petitioner secured 54 marks. The petitioner was not offered appointment. It is the say of the petitioner that he called on the office of the Staff Selection Commission, Chandigarh and was told to bring a new caste certificate. He got a fresh caste certificate from the office of Tehsildar Fazilka, Punjab which was issued in continuation of the earlier caste certificate submitted with the application form. This OBC certificate is dated 09.05.2012 (P-7). He did not appear from the Commission. The petitioner served a legal notice on the respondents dated 22.05.2012 claiming appointment for reason of qualifying all the tests demanded by the criteria for appointment. In response to the legal notice, the petitioner received a letter dated 10.07.2012 from the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has been informed as follows:-

(2.) On notice of motion having been issued, the Staff Selection Commission has filed a reply dated 26.10.2012. The reason for denial of offer of appointment is stated to be want for OBC certificate in the format prescribed under the Head "Important Instructions to Candidates". The result of the petitioner was declared in the unreserved category where he did not meet the merit determined for the general category. The closing dates under the advertisement was 04.03.2011 and, therefore, the amended caste certificate dated 09.05.2012 submitted by the petitioner to establish his caste status is beyond the cut off point and, therefore, not acceptable. Still further by treating the petitioner as a general category candidate, he was found overage by about 25 days as his date of birth is 06.07.1988 and the age limit for general category candidates was fixed within the limits of 18-23 years as on 01.08.2011. The rejection is therefore legal and valid. All steps leading to selection were provisional in nature and conferred no right to appointment in absence of a valid OBC certificate presented in the prescribed format for recruitment to Central Government service. The earlier OBC certificate relied upon by the petitioner was in Punjab format meant for OBCs. Note 2 to the public notice inviting applications issued by the respondent-Commission is cited against the petitioner. Note 2 reads as follows:-

(3.) Note 4(C) deals with process of certification and format of certificates. Note 4(C) reads as follows:-