Jai Prakash Singh vs The Govt. of India and Others

Ajay Kr. Tripathi, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner offered himself for enrollment in the Army on the post of General Duty Sipahi in terms of an advertisement issued in the year, 2003. The advertisement is dated 12th January, 2003 and has been brought on record as Annexure-F to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents. It seems to be advertisement for special recruitment of the wards of servicemen either in service or retired or children of widows of soldiers. The recruitment was limited to certain geographical areas indicated in the advertisement. Since the petitioner claimed himself to be a ward of former Ex-Army man he appeared in enrollment process. He supplied documents in support of his educational qualification etc. which showed that he had studied at Rajkiyakrit Uchch Vidyalaya, Masarh, District-Bhojpur. He was supposed to have passed matriculation examination from the said school and certification of the kind has been issued by Bihar School Examination Board. After due process and verification of records, the petitioner was not selected and that gave him a cause of action to approach this High Court in the present writ application. He has alleged many a things as a reason for his non-selection. He has tried to insinuate that enrollment was being made for consideration through touts and since he did not avail of their service he did not succeed in obtaining enrollment or being recruited in the Army.

In terms of the earlier order passed by this Court the original records have been produced before this Court for perusal and verification of the averments made in the writ application and the stand taken by respondents in their counter affidavit. The record has been examined by this Court.

In the counter affidavit which has been filed on behalf of the respondents they deny the wrong doing or insinuation made by the petitioner in the writ application. The reason why the petitioner was not selected was because he had furnished a document which turned out to be a fake School Leaving Certificate and this disentitled him from enrollment or recruitment in the Army. They state that in terms of the advertisement the petitioner realized that he did not belong to the geographical area for which the recruitment was made. This could be one of the reasons which prompted him to submit some more documents in support of his residence as well as School Leaving Certificate, which are available with the original record which has been produced by the respondents. This School Leaving Certificate is from one Sant Gagan Baba Uchch Vidaylaya, Rambad, Maner Patna. It was sent for verification and the Headmaster of the School categorically certified that the said School Leaving Certificate has not been issued from the School as he was never a student of the school. Based on the certification the authorities have rejected the claim of the petitioner for recruitment.

The stand of the respondents seems to be borne out from a perusal of the entire set of documents which has been produced in original. Petitioner has pursued his education, no doubt, from the High School located at Masarh, Bhojpur but then probably he realized that unless he produced certain material which would assist the authority in considering him for recruitment for the concerned area as indicated in Annexure-E he would not succeed. This could have prompted him to rely on certain documents which have gone against his interest. The reflections of the above stand taken in the counter affidavit are there and the Court is not swayed or persuaded by the submission that things are amiss and recruitment in the Army is for consideration as has been sought to be made out by the petitioner. The Court does not deny the fact that some complaints of the kind had been made and the Army Authorities had taken immediate action and even a criminal case against certain touts came to be instituted as would be evident from Annexure-7, but then the case of the petitioner is not of the kind where the Court will have to certify that his recruitment has been refused by the respondents for extraneous reason and not for the reason which has been pleaded in the counter affidavit as well as the document which has been produced by them for perusal of this Court. In view of above the petitioner has no case. This writ application is dismissed.