-^—=—-=— ' 1 AMEMDED PETITION IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fCHHATTISGARH) W.P. (S)No.6^l{ /2008 PETITIONER RESPQNDENTS ^ k-5- ^^ ^rc Aakash Kumar Patel, S/o. Shri R. C. Patel, aged about 28 years, R/o. N.T.P.C. Power House Road, Agarkhar, Post Jamnipali, Distt. Korba (C.G.). VERSUS (1) Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Through the Secretary, C.S.E.B. Dagania, Raipur (C.G.) (2) Chief Engineer, Office of Chief Engineer, Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Bilaspur (C.G.) (3) Caste Certificate High Level Scmtiny Committee, through its Members 8& Director of the Caste Certificate High Level Scrutiny Committee, Adimjati, Anusandhan Avam Prasikshan Sansthan, Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla University Campus, Raipur (C.G.) (4) Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited, through its Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited (Govt. of Chhattisgarh Undertaking and a successor company of C.S.E.B.), Registered Office - Viddhut Sewa Bhawan, Ground Floor, Daganiya,< Raipur (C.G.) <^- /, (5) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, through its Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (Govt. of Chhattisgarh Undertaking and a successor company of C.S.E.B.), Registered Office ~ Viddhut Sewa Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur (C.G.) (6) Chief Engineer, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Liinited, Tifra, Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA -^l ^:^^s^ r ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ; BILASPUR Writ Petition(8) No.6364 of 2008 Petitioner Aakash Kumar Patel Versiis Respondents Chhattisgarh State Electiicity Boai'd, & otliers WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIQN OF INDIA (SB: Hon'ble ShriSatish K. AgmhotriJ.) Shri Vitiod Deshmukli, Advocate for tfae petitiouer. Shri B, D. GIUTI, Advocate.for ttie respondents No. 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6. Shri M. P. S. Bhatia, Govt Advocate for the respondent No.3. OR D ER (Oral) (Passed on fhis 29th day ofJaauaiy, 2010) Heard. The petitioner, by this petition seeks a direction to tiie respondents No. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 to appouit him on ttie post of Attendaat Grade-II (Lnie), treatiag hiin as a general caiididate, iastead of OBC categoiy candidate, iti accordaace with his placeiaent i.e. 100 in the conimon select Mst (Annexure P/7). 1 Brief facts, in nutsheU, as projected, are tliat the on 20.8.1980 (Annexure P/ 1) fhe petitioner born m district Korba. The caste of Uie petitioner is Kachi (Kiishwaha), tlius he belongs to Otlier Back^7ard Class (OBC). In tiiis regard a caste certfficate (Annexure P/5) of OBC was issued to fhe petitioner on 28.6.2006. Pursuant to the ^ advertisement dated 28.3.2006 (Aunexure P/6) tJie petitioner applied for tfae post of Atteudaiit Grade-II as aii O.B.C. candidate. On the basis of the niarks obtamed by tlie respective caadidates ia Industrial Traimng Ceitificate (I.T.I.) a commou select/merit list (Annexure P/7) was prepared, whereia tlie naaie of flie petitioner was placed at serial No. 100 as an unreser^ed categor\r (general) caadidate. Subsequentiy, by letter dated 28.7.2007 (Annexure P/8) the petitioner was directed to appear on 29.8.2007 aloug with origiaal docuiiients, iacludiag the easte certificate, havitig verified from the High level Caste Scrutmy Committee, Accordiagiy, slfter receipt of tlie letter dated 28.7.2007 (Aiuiexure y^f^"^ ^iA. '%. ^ P/8) the petitioner submitted aii appMcation on 25.7.2007 to fhe High Level Caste Sciiitiiiy Committee for verification of his caste cei-tificate. By letter dated 25.8.2007 (Annexure P/9) it was iafoniied to the petitioner tliat suice his father was a pemiaixent resident ofthe State ofMadhya Pradesh aiid traasferred to Korba from Jabalpur m the year 1978, caste Kachi (Kuswaha) of the petitioner, does not coiiie under O.B.C. in ftie State of Chhattisgai'h. Thus, tlie petitioner Vv7ould coine under general categoiy. Thereailer, tiie petitioner subxnitted a representation on 20.8.2007 aad subsequentiy on 21.4.2008 (Annexure P/10) to consider his caiididature for appouitoaient on tlie post of Attendaat Grade-II under unreserved (general) category because his naxae was already placed at serial No. 100 iti ttie coxximoa select/raerit Ust. Shri Viiiod Deshmukh, learaed counsel appeaniig for tlie petitioner would subrait fhat the grievaace of fhe petitioner is tliat even tlie caadidates, whose names were placed below in rank io. tlie comixion select/mierit Ust (Annexure P/7), have been appoiated, iguoring tlie clauii of the petitioner. In siinUar facts situatiou, Shri Neeraj Siiigh Chauhao. and Sliri Nirmal Sonkure, who could not coine under reseived categoiy after scratiay by tiie High Level Caste Scrutmy Conmiittee, were given appouitment (Aniiexure P/ 11) on the post of Junior Engiaeer (Mechaiiical), treatiiig fhem unreserved (general) caadidates. Shri B. D. Guin, leam-ed coiiusel appeatiag for the respoudents No, 1,2, 4, 5 aad 6, on the basis of tlie retum, filed on 15.12.2008, subniits fhat ftie name of tlie petitioner was placed at serial No. 410 ia fhe raerit list The petitioner appUed as aa OBC caiididate but tlie caste of fhe petitioner does uot come under OBC in fhe State of Chhattisgarh. No caadidates, below ttie raiik to tlie petitioner, m fhe select/merit Ust, have been appoiEited to the post of Attendant Grade-II(Lirie). I have hear-d learaed couusel appearmg for the parties aiid perused the pleadiags and docuraents appended tliereto. It is evident from flie common select/merit Ust (Amiexure P/7) that the naaie of fhie petitioner is placed at serial No, 100 as OBC ^^ 8. 9. 10. Thalmr ^ caadidate (100 Akash Kumar Patel - R. C. Patel - OBC). The petitioner has not poiiited out aay of tlie iiistaiice tliat caiididates below tlie raiik to tlie petitioner froin the select/nierit Ust have been given appoiataient as general candidates. It is tdte law that tf a reserved categor)r caiididate fiiids place ia. uureser^ed categor}r i.e. general, he has to be treated iii accordance with his Bierit in tlie select list. He caanot be thrown back m the Mst for reserved category. (See R. K. Sabharwal & Others ^. State of Puajab & Others1). In view of tlie foregonig, this Court is of tiie opHiion fliat it would be just and proper to direct fhe respondents/authorities t.o consider tlie case of fhe petitioner for appoiatinent on the post of Attendaiit Grade -II (Lnie/Plant) as general caiididate, ia accordaiice with the COBIBIOU select/raerit Ust (Annexure P/7). If tlie namie of ttie petitioner is found ia fhe general categor^7 select Hst for appouifaiient, appropriate order niay be passed treatbig hici a general candidate. For fhe reasons afore-stated, the petition is allowe.cl to fl:ie above extent. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge '(1995) 2 SCC 745