- (1.) By this order CWP Nos.24081 and 26653 of 2015 would be disposed of. In CWP No.24081 of 2015, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to complete training pursuant to the appointment letter dated 9.10.2015. In CWP No.26653 of 2015, the petitioner has questioned the cancellation of provisional offer of appointment as Clerk dated 12.11.2015 vide Annexure P-8. For the purpose of facts, CWP No.24081 of 2015 is taken into consideration.
(2.) The respondents have advertised for the post of Clerks on 9.8.2014. The petitioner is one of the candidate for recruitment to the post of Clerk. He had submitted his application on 20.8.2014. In the application form, he has stated that he belongs to OBC category and insofar as question posed that "Are you an Ex-Serviceman : YES". His date of birth has been mentioned as 30.10.1971. As on 1.8.2014, he has a completed 42 years of age. In the advertisement, age prescribed for the post of Clerk is minimum 20 years and maximum 28 years. Relaxation with regard to age has been given to various reserved categories like for OBC 3 years and Ex- Serviceman/Disabled Ex-serviceman three years and actual period of service rendered in the defence forces + 3 years (8 years for Disabled Ex-Serviceman belonging to SC/ST) subject to a maximum age limit of 50 years. In this background, petitioner was selected and appointed to the post of Clerk vide appointment letter dated 9.10.2015. Petitioner was directed to undergo training w.e.f. 2.11.2015. Accordingly, he has reported on 2.11.2015. On 4.11.2015, respondents have prevented the petitioner to undergo training verbally on the sole ground that with reference to the decision of the Apex Court in Ram Singh and others Vs. Union of India, 2015 2 SCT 424 decided on 17.3.2015 wherein it was held that OBC certificate issued to the Jat Community has been struck down. The petitioner approached this Court in the above writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to permit petitioner to complete training. By virtue of interim order, petitioner has completed his training. During pendency of this petition, respondents have cancelled the appointment offered to the petitioner to the post of Clerk on 12.11.2015. Feeling aggrieved by the order of cancellation dated 12.11.2015, the petitioner has presented CWP No.26653 of 2015.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner's name cannot be considered under OBC category on the ground that he do not fulfill the age criteria, namely, maximum 28 years plus 3 years relaxation (OBC) which would be 31 years. As on 1.8.2014, the petitioner is aged about 42 years. Therefore, his candidature is required to be considered only against Ex-Serviceman category. The respondents have considered candidature of the petitioner under Ex-Serviceman category by incorporating his name in the Select List at Serial No.121 (Ex-Serviceman Select List) and he has been allotted to Indian Bank and not under OBC Select List. Therefore, selection and appointment of the petitioner under Ex- Serviceman category is in order. The respondents' presumption that the petitioner has been selected under OBC category is incorrect and the action to cancel the appointment vide letter dated 12.11.2015 is issued without application of mind. No opportunity was given before refusal to participate in the training and cancelling appointment order.;