Abida Anjum vs Chairman, U.K. Public Service Commission And Another

Vipin Sanghi, CJ

Learned counsel for the respondent-Commission has tendered in the Court, today, the instructions received by him from the Department which are taken on record.

As we have already noticed in our last order dated 20.07.2022, the candidature of the petitioner for participation in the Mains Examination has been rejected on the ground that the OBC certificate submitted by her is of a date later than 20.01.2022, and not of a date prior to 20.01.2022. The instructions reported by the learned counsel for the respondent-Commission is that upon rejection of petitioner’s candidature on 21.6.2022, she could submit her representation up to 12.7.2022, however, that was not done, and she submitted her representation on 15.7.2022. Since that representation was not responded to, the petitioner has preferred this petition.

It is pertinent to note that the instructions reported by the respondent-Commission acknowledge the fact that the OBC certificate provided by the petitioner dated 22.01.2022 (mentioned in instructions as 20.01.2022) is valid. Pertinently, the petitioner, upon being told that the OBC certificate should be of a date prior to the last date for submission of on-line application, thereafter submitted the older OBC certificate dated 18.10.2019. The respondents have, however, not considered the same. The reason for non-consideration of petitioner’s representation is that the same was late by three days.

In our view, the stand taken by the respondents, firstly with regard to the date-that the OBC certificate should be of a prior date, appears to be completely illogical and arbitrary. An OBC certificate, which is issued at a later date, is a more reliable certificate as it is possible that the candidate may have come into the creamy layer and may not be entitled to grant of reservation. A person who submits an older OBC certificate is more suspect to have moved into the creamy layer than a candidate who submits a later dated certificated. There is no rationale as to why the respondents should insist that the OBC certificate should be of a date prior to the date of last date of submission of on-line application form, when the submission of OBC certificate itself is required to be made at a later date.

Secondly, it is not that the petitioner did not submit the OBC certificate of a prior date. As aforesaid, the petitioner submitted the OBC certificate dated 18.10.2019 as well. Merely because the same was submitted three days after the date fixed for submission of representation, is not sufficient enough to not to consider the petitioner’s representation. The respondents are expected to act with a greater sense of sensitivity in such matters when it concerns the future prospects of young and promising candidates. The petitioner had cleared the Preliminary Examination and by not considering her candidature, the system may lose out a bright young candidate.

We, therefore, allow this writ petition and direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the Mains Examination of Uttarakhand Judicial Services Civil Judge (Junior Division) Examination 2021 to be held from 2.8.2022 to 5.8.2022.

The petitioner shall complete relevant formalities by tomorrow for which she shall meet the respondent no.2 i.e. Secretary, Uttarakhand Public Service Commission in his office tomorrow at 11 AM.

Let a copy of this order be supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner today itself as per the prescribed Rules.