AMRIT KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court claiming the appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian (Non-teaching Staff) for which post the petitioner had applied in pursuance to an advertisement issued by the respondents. It is asserted by the counsel for the petitioner that the name of the petitioner figured at serial No. 50 in the merit list prepared for the scheduled caste category. She had obtained 53.5 marks. Petitioner appeared for scrutiny of the documents and the scrutiny form also indicated that scheduled caste certificates were shown by the petitioner which were duly accepted by the respondents. At the time of the declaration of the final result, name of the petitioner was shown in the general category at serial No. 199 whereas she was entitled to be considered under the scheduled caste category for which post and category she had already been selected and placed at serial No. 50. Persons who were lower in the merits in the scheduled caste category have been appointed. Petitioner, thereafter, submitted a representation dated 29.06.2011 (Annexure P-8) to the Chairman Selection Committee, Office of Director Public Instructions (S) Punjab-respondent No. 3 highlighting the claim of the petitioner against the scheduled caste category; she being a scheduled caste as she belongs to Adharmi caste. When no reasons were assigned for considering the petitioner as a general category candidate, petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition challenging the action of the respondents.

(2.) Reply to the petition has been filed by the respondents according to which the claim of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian under the scheduled caste category had not been considered as the scheduled caste category certificate which was produced by the petitioner depicted the husband's name instead of her father's name which according to the respondents was not in consonance with the requirements of the instructions and, therefore, her candidature was considered under the general category.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner as scheduled caste category is not sustainable as no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner nor any explanation was sought from her. Petitioner was born adharmi as her father belonged to the same caste. This she states on the basis of the certificate dated 09.07.1990 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Dasuya which was issued to the petitioner when she was unmarried. It is apparent from the said certificate that the petitioner is a scheduled caste belonging to Adharmi caste. The certificate produced by the petitioner at the time of submitting the application form and at the time of the counseling was the one which was subsequently issued to her on her marriage to Charanjit Singh who also belongs to scheduled caste category. He further states that on the date when the second certificate was issued to the petitioner, the father of the petitioner had already expired and, therefore, the name of the husband of the petitioner figured in the scheduled caste certificate. He contends that once a person had been declared scheduled caste then the caste of the concerned person would not change even if marriage takes place with a person who is of a higher caste. But in the present case, petitioner had been married to another scheduled caste person and, therefore, there can be no doubt. He on the basis contends that action of respondents rejecting the candidature of the petitioner as scheduled caste category candidate cannot sustain.