- (1.) The instant intra court appeal is against the order dated 13.11.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.5865 of 2017, whereby and whereunder the writ petition has been allowed with a direction upon the respondent no.5, the Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission to recommend the name of the petitioner taking sympathetic view that he has qualified in all the events and obtained much more marks than the last selected candidate for appointment to the post of Constable in terms of the Jharkhand Constable Competitive Examination-2015.
(2.) The brief facts of the case which would be necessary before entering into the legality and propriety of the impugned order, are required to be enumerated hereunder as: The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission has come out with an advertisement issued in the month of July 2015 for appointment as Constable inviting online applications. The writ petitioner-respondent no.5 along with others participated in the process of selection in which he has been found to be qualified under the Economically Backward Class-I (EBC-I) category after being successful in preliminary examination conducted on 30.01.2016 as also in the written Mains Examination held on 25.09.2016. In consequence thereof, he was called upon for the Physical and Medical test, for which a fresh Admit Card was issued to the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner-respondent no.5 appeared in the physical test conducted on 27.11.2016 in the district of Hazaribagh and thereafter he was called for verification of certificates on 04.01.2017. However, the appellants-Commission did not issue offer of appointment. It is the grievance of the writ petitioner-respondent no.5 that he has obtained 176 marks in his category i.e. EBC-I, whereas the cut off marks of EBC-I category for the district of Ramgarh is 167 and as such by not issuing the offer of appointment the Commission-the respondents have conducted gross illegality. The writ petitioner-respondent no.5 made a representation for redressal of grievance but having no effect, he had approached this Court by filing writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being W.P.(S) No.5865 of 2017 which was allowed vide order dated 13.11.2017 against which the present intra court appeal has been filed.
(3.) The case of the appellants-Commission is that the writ Court has committed gross illegality in allowing the writ petition, deviating from the conditions stipulated in the advertisement pertaining to submission of caste certificate for getting the benefit of reservation under EBC-I category. According to the appellants-Commission, it is the admitted case of the writ petitioner-respondent no.5 that the caste certificate has been furnished but that was issued on 16.05.2011 while as per the conditions stipulated in the advertisement, the requirement was to produce the caste certificate issued to be on or after 31.03.2015 in Appendix-3 as has been provided in the advertisement itself. The case of the appellants-Commission is that subsequent to the certificate dated 16.05.2011 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Ramgarh, the writ petitioner had made an application on 25.12.2016. The case of the appellants-Commission is that the writ petitioner has failed to furnish the caste certificate in terms of the condition stipulated in the advertisement wherein the requirement is to produce the caste certificate issued on or after 31.03.2015 but the writ petitioner has made an application on 25.12.2016 in order to cover up the conditions stipulated in the advertisement. The fact about issuance of caste certificate on or after 31.03.2015 by the Circle Officer, Dulmi is not acceptable in view of the specific conditions stipulated in the advertisement to the effect that the caste certificate issued on or after 31.03.2015 either by the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district or the Sub Divisional Officer of the concerned Sub Division would only be acceptable and on that basis the offer of appointment has not been issued in favour of the petitioner rather his candidature has been rejected since on the day when original certificate was verified i.e. 04.01.2017, no such caste certificate has been produced as per the requirement under the conditions stipulated in the advertisement. According to the appellants-Commission the writ Court has not appreciated the aforesaid aspect of the matter and allowed the writ petition holding the approach of the appellants-Commission as hyper technical and issued direction upon the respondents to take sympathetic view with respect to the grievance of the petitioner by issuing offer of appointment on the ground that writ petitioner-respondent no.5 has secured more marks than the last selected candidate. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants-Commission that when any condition stipulated as per advertisement has not been complied in its letter and spirit and if there is any deviation from the conditions stipulated in the advertisement, the candidature is to be rejected and accordingly, the appellants-Commission, considering the aforesaid position, had rejected the candidature of the writ petitioner, thus, while doing so no illegality was committed. ;