In CWP-65-2021 (O&M)-PUNJ HC- It is trite to say that every citizen in country is born equal unless he claims any special benefits based on his caste and has right under Article 16 of Constitution to be considered in General category: P&H HC
Justice Arun Monga [18-08-2022]

Read Order: Hukam Chand v. State of Haryana and Others 

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, September 2, 2022:  The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that although the candidate before it opted for a reserved category, but he did not avail any special age relaxation or special additional marks under the category or having appeared before a separate interview Board or separate examination, and therefore, to contend that the petitioner was disentitled to be considered in General category merely because he belonged to the Backward class, was completely out of place.

Also, the Bench of Justice Arun Monga held, “It is trite to say that every citizen in a country is born equal unless he claims any special benefits on the basis of his caste and has a right under Article 16 of the Constitution of India to be considered in the General category.”

Pursuant to a 2015 advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of Junior  Engineer (Horticulture) under BCA category. He cleared the written examination, but was not called in the interview process and the result was declared. 

The petitioner approached Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC), but he was still not called for scrutiny of the documents and in fact candidates securing less marks than the petitioner were called for the interview. 

It was the case of the petitioner’s counsel that pursuant to an order of the High Court, the petitioner appeared in the interview and he secured 118 marks in the written examination, but the  interview marks are not disclosed to him. Further, it was submitted that there was a selected candidate who secured 158 marks in the written  examination and 10 marks but he did not join as such. Resultantly, a candidate put in the waiting list and having less marks (than the petitioner) in the written examination was given the appointment. 

On the other hand, the State counsel submitted that pursuant a High Court order, petitioner’s documents were provisionally scrutinised and he was found “Eligible”. He further contended that a candidate claiming reservation can be considered on the basis of his  merit against General category only at the time of preparation of final results and not at earlier stages, if he submits all his documents as per his claim in  the application form and there is no contravention of any terms and  conditions of the advertisement and he does not seek any relaxation and  fulfils all conditions of the General category candidate. 

He submitted that if a candidate proves his eligibility in the category applied for, only then he/ she can be considered against an unreserved post otherwise the candidate will apply under reserved category and will get concession and thereafter will claim to consider him/ her for the post which is not meant for reserved category. It will amount to injustice to those candidates who have applied under unreserved category and have paid requisite fee, the Counsel added. 

Lastly, it was argued that the petitioner had in fact, availed concession of fee payable for the examination to be conducted and, therefore, he could not be treated in General category since fee payable in the General category was high up.

After hearing the parties, the Court opined at the very outset that it is trite to say that every citizen in a country is born equal unless he claims any special benefits on the basis of his caste and has a right under Article 16 of the  Constitution of India to be considered in the General category. 

Coming to the case at hand, the Court observed that although the petitioner opted for BCA category, but he did not avail any special age relaxation and/ or special additional marks under the category or having appeared before a separate interview Board and/ or a separate examination, and therefore, to contend that the petitioner was disentitled to be considered in General category merely because he belonged to the Backward class, was completely out of place. 

Further, the Court came to the conclusion that  the petitioner was entitled to consider his claim against a vacancy in General  Category on the basis of his merit in the said category.

Thus, the Court directed the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner in  general category in accordance with the marks obtained by him and proceed further in accordance with law. 

Justice Monga held, “Petitioner’s candidature will be considered,  subject of course to availability of post as on today; in case he is selected but post is not available, he shall be given the benefit for the vacancy in future; petitioner shall not be entitled to monetary benefits on the principle of ‘No Work No Pay’ and he shall be given due credence qua his seniority and other consequential benefits w.e.f. the same date when his counter-parts were appointed.”