^?M <330^T ?5T ^?N? ^^IT 3il^i ^^S^) ^\ T^T •^I^I^'M, ^rfl^^Ko, is|(yl>l'y'4,< ^INdl '*NI<*s .W.:.£...(^.^2S^200^ W^ ^(^ (yg[^^) T^TWHfi^ 3??^? PETITIONER: RESPONDENT: {Petition underArticle Sinale Bench: Hon Sirajuddin Qureshi, S/o Shri Nasiruddin Quershi, Age 34, R/o L.I.G. 14, Inderawati Colony, Raipur(C.G-) Versus - High Court of Chhattisgarh, Through its Registrar General, Bilaspur (C.G.) 226 ofthe Constitution of India} Lble Mr. Justice L.C. Bhadoo 6-5-2008 Mr. Ali Asgar, counsel for| Mr. Manindra Shrivastal/a Shrivastava, Advocate for the The petitioner by this Constitution of India has que^ decision of the respondent whe< has been rejectedon the grounc| The petitioner's case is entitled for relaxation of age by that there was no specific attaching the OBC certificate petitioner could not attach the form. Therefore, the decision of chNfd^il^ ^W^t ^fe^ <fa^s< ^sffOT^I^T ^he petitioner. Senior Advocate with Mr. Ashish re^pondent. tA/rit petition under Article 226 of the ^tioned legality and correctness of the |eby the application form of the petitioner ofbeingover age. |that being an OBC candidate he was p years, but on account of ambiguityand rr|ention in the advertisement regarding i|n order to avail relaxation in age, the (RBC certificate along with his application the respondent rejecting the application -78 ^ 3^T??Tpn^T, ^ft^FR, Ist^wy ^n^T^iTfei^ ^SH ^T^T ^TRNT 'qro^r *N(ch C^.^5>^^ WS, 2QQS 3^9T'GRT^ (^?1^<^) ^mWRf^^^ ^l^id^l'l "W^ ^?,'fe1^ Tf^?R •^^fwsn^i 4 form of the petitioner on the grcjund of over age is illegal. It has also been mentioned in the petition that ^ entitled for relaxation of age s the Government servants who are also up to 38 years have not attached the certificate regarding their statu^ of a Government employee, even then relaxation has been given to t|iem without any certificate, merely on a mention being made by thenl Government servants. Therefo in the application form that they are 'e, on the ground of discrimination meted out to the petitioner, he is entitle|d for the relief sought by him. Brief facts leading to i\ respondent High Court in orde Class-11, invited applications by Last date for receiving the appli' General of the High Court iling of this writ petition are that the r to fill up the vacancies of Civil Judge, lissuing an advertisement Annexure P-1. |)ation forms in the Office of the Registrar as 1st March, 2008. The candidates belonging to SC, ST & OBC, as| per clause 5 of the advertisement, were allowed relaxation in age by five| years, whereas permanent & temporary Govemment emptoyees of the apply up to the age of 38 year^ relaxation of 10 years in age. JV\ OBC candidate has also applied State of Chhattisgarh were allowed to and the female candidates were given e petitioner who claims himself to be the and his application fcrm was received in the Office ofthe Registrar Genei|al on 20th February, 2008 i.e. well within the prescribed time. Date of b|rth of the petitioner is 30th September, 1973, as on 1-1-2009, which v^as the date on which the age of the candidate was to be considered,| he crossed the age of 35 years as per 1 ^ss^^I ^CI-HC-22: 37T^T^T r<rii<=h ^^\ 5^^\^ '<-i[^a *11*1Crtl ^ "3'^T r^ll^ld<LI, ^Ti1<i<i<o, f^<ni<i<i< 3TT^T ^3R ^h^ich 200^ •1^^8T" 371^1'^TTW^Tf^T his date of birth. As the petitioner| his OBC status for getting benefit been rejected. Ultimately, the petit of mandamus directing the respon^ Judge, Class-11 preliminary examin< Return has been filed on been mentioned that as the p^ certificate to avail the benefit of a<| under clause 5 read with clause application form has rightly been rej advertisement inviting applications| Judge, Class-11 contains variou^ submission of properly filled apy / required documents as specified explicitly required in no uncertain relaxation of age by virtue of submit relevantcertificate which su< the very initial stage. The petiti required certjficate showing that h The application form was rejected. all 377 such application forms of required certificates have been n belhalf <=hl^(d4lr1 'RFT^f '? f^^l ipal^K '^'a^m^T^T belon^ing did not attach the certjficate regarding ^)f five years, his application form has |oner has prayed for issuance of a writ [lent to allow him to appear in the Civil ^tion. of the respondent in which it has ttitioner failed to submit necessary |e relaxation, as mandatorily required |0 of the advertisement, therefore, his lected. It has been mentioned that the for appointment to the post of Civil termsand conditions relating to ^lication form along with necessary in the advertisement and also very terms that the candidates claiming to reserved category will have to |;h candidate was required to submit at (3ner did not annex the mandatorily ^ belongs to Other Backward Class. It has further been mentioned that in ^e candidates who did not attach the Jected, out of which 41 applications [Tfr^ ^Ra^ r--€3^^ f &. _-- 1 1_ J 'IS81^ Jxi-HC-22. JJ' Y'W^ w^ ^' '^^L.^^ 'STT^T'^T f^ri^'aTi^r 5h^i<=n <4f^a ^ -3"o5r ^||<4|<r|<4, ^Til<i^(o, fa^ll^iy 3Tf^r 'q^? ..^.S>.:!^^b?!°l WWTT ^NTcb 200^ "I^^T' 317^T'^fT8[R ^f^T were of ST, 102 of SC & 234 of be dismissed. 1 have heard learnedcouns^l Mr. Ali Asgar, learned cour|sel attention of the Court towards th( though in clause 5 of the advej relaxation in respect of age menjtioned production of the certificate, but condition of attaching the certificat^ in such a manner i.e. the same hat to change of address. Therefore, read the paragraph regarding cha^ge QBC candidates. Therefore, the petition the certificate for relaxation of ag be^n submitted that it has nowhere if the certificate is not submitted,! Standard practice, so far, was tha| the time of main examination examination which is evident from) Public Service Commission. He Government employees have age of 38 years, but they have regarding their status as Governrfient asked to send application formi allso be^n <=hl<4f<vl<lflrl 'RTR^f ^ fe^ <Fn^l< ^ N^m 3n^r for the parties. sel for the petitioner, while inviting the [e advertisement, submitted that even ^tisement it has been mentioned that in clause 5 will be allowed on |n clause 20 of the advertisement the for relaxation of age has been printed t been printed in the paragraph relating was not expected of the candidates to of address in order to find whether is required to be submitted. He also mentioned in this advertisement that the application form will be rejected. such certificates were being asked at md not at the stage of preliminary the advertisement issued by the M.P. argued that permanent & temporary allowed relaxation of age up to the Inot been asked to submit certificate servants, they have been simply directly to the Registry mentioning ['q^'^fe^ ,^"?: '•-i^-^"":^ ^, XI-HC-22- \^^' ^n^r^r Rrli5h ^(^\ 9^<*-ii<=h <Mf^a -3TaEf ^L||^||cr|<4, ^Til^^Ko, f®j<rtl^y 3^?T 'q^? ^.^S...^).^£^l '^^ST' ^nWTT ^HI <=h 200 § chl^lfd^lrl 'HTR^lf "^ t^st <p3l^l< ^T 37f^W ^IT^T therein that they are Governmen|t servants and they were required to send an intimation to that effect t| the respondent is discriminatory. be directed to allow the petit| 3 the employer. Therefore, this act of In the circumstances, the respondent ioner to appear in the preliminary examination subject to submittin|g of certificate at the time of main examination. On the other hand, Mr. l\|1anindra Shrivastava, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respon|Jent, while inviting the attention of the Court towards the advertisement F|ublishedon three occasions, firstly, on ^th >th 13m Febryary, 2008 & thirdly on 20" se 5 of the advertisement deals with 6l" February, 2008, secondly on February, 2008, argued that clat relaxation of age to a particular cl^ss of candidate and in the last, it has been mentioned that relaxation in ^ige shall be allowed onlyon production of the certificate. He also argued|that at the bottom of clause 20 of the advertisement it has been mention|ed that for preliminary examination the candidates are required to submit t;ertifjcate to the Registry for relaxation of age. All the certificates are examination. Model of the applica candidates are required to submit submit the certificate along with to be attached at the time of main ion form for main examination shall be intimated after the result of p|reliminary examination is declared. Therefore, learned Senior Couns^l submitted that at two places it has been mentioned in the advertis^ment that for relaxation of age the certificate. Requiring a candidate to the application form is sufficient to [^^fe^ r JXI-HC-22 ^T^T^T f^N'^TT^T 5t)^ich ^f^a '^? ^qrpTf^zr^ ^Til^^Ko, fa<yii^y 3ni^r^xl3^, . ^(^M-7^1 ^I*1C(1I ^*IT^) 200 I^ST' sebarate indicate that if certificate is not application form shall not be acc< allowed to the candidate. Necessjary to submit certificate in order to a|\ certificate is not attached with th^ shall not be entitled for relaxation Mr. Manindra Shrivastava subntitted Government employees are candidates, even if the Governmeht the certificate of being Governm^ entitled to seek same treatmentl Moreover, as per the advertisem( the application forms of the Goveilnment send the forms directly to the Regfstry the application form to the Regist^ they areapplying for Civil Judge,| required to submit an undertakingl regarding submission of applicat| sufficient to show that they are Gd^ Having heard learned courji petition, the reply, the advertiserrjent the advertisement reveals that cl< relaxationin age tothe candidat^s cni^F<rt^1rl 'HPT^f ^ fe^ <p3l^l< ^3T^TH3^^T attached for relaxation of age, the tpted and relaxation in age will not be implication of asking the candidate ijvail age relaxation is that in case the ^ application form, then the candidate |of age. Replying to another argument, that in the first instance, the class from SC, ST & OBC employees were not asked to submit snt employees, the petitioner was not |being a candidate of separate class. ^nt in order to avoid delay in receipt of employees they were allowed to with acondition that while sending ^y they should jntimate their Office that Class-11 examination. They were also |that they have informed their employer [on form to the Registry and that was vernment employees. sel for the parties, 1 have perused the ent and the relevant rules. Perusal of ause 5 of the advertisement deals with s of certain classes, among them OBC [Tft^ ^pa^ ^F -HC-22 37T^T^T f<rii<=h ^nt?T 5^^ic^ ^f^a 1 •^aET-^nzrRT^, ^Tll^^Ko, fa<r11^li< an^r^ra^ ^<p^^^-f-7oi So ^l+idl ^h^licb 200 I^^T' W^T ^CT^R ^Tftn arte candidatesare also there who years, but at the end of clause 5 it age shall be allowed on productic|n ST & OBC, which entitles relaxatibn the advertisement, it has be4 examination, the candidates are Registry for relaxation in age. Of been published at the end of preliminary examination the candic relaxation in age, but it has beeili account of this fact, the petitioner required to submit certificate re|quired clalise alorjg examination. Every candidate ap|pearing / under obligation and caution that ^t the advertisement carefully, dilig^r should escape from his notice in o^ form on account of non-submjssi^ from clause 19 of the advertisem< notice was not given in the advert|s( preliminary examination regardinc application form and certificates to| Not only once, the said advertiserlient dates in order to make awarel <=hl^fd41r1 'HPR^ff"? 'f^zt '^R?R ^ ^ri^Fr 37i^r entitled for relaxation in age by five has been mentioned that relaxation in of certificate that he belongs to SC, in age. At the end of clause 20 of m mentioned that for preliminary to submit their certificates to the ;ourse, this requirement ought to have 5 that at the time of applying for |ate shouldattach certificate regarding published in the last. However, on (sannot claim immunity that he was not with the application for preliminary in any examination is always ^efore applying he is expected to read ^ntly and intelligently so that nothing ^der to avoid rejection of his application i()n of any document which is evident ^nt. It is not a case where sufficient jsement to the candidates applying for the information to be filled in the |be attached with the application form. was published on three different every person intending to submit [Tft^ ^Psi^ ^f^^ ,1/ i^^~L I-HC-22 3^T^T k^ 3T1^T 5^^i<^ 'Mi^a 3\ '^^r ^IPTI^PT, ^n1^<i<o, fa^i^y 3TT^T 'V^R _....^..B:^, ^TH^TT^h^lch 200^ "fe^sr' 37T^?r ^H^R'^ft?T application form to read carefull\|, conditions for filing the application| The contention of Mr. Ali As{ the certificates were being asked the time of preliminary examinatic|n petitioner had not submitted the was required to read the adv< knowledge that the advertisemer|l subject to change and variationsf, issued so that the candidates willl apply according to the inviting the applications for Civil petitioner ought not to have remai the previous advertisements. changed, eligibility criteria are changed. Therefore, 1 do not advanced by Mr. Ali Asgar. Coming to the next point been allowed to send the form direb without attaching the certificate employee, perusal of clause 11of | Government employees, shows applicationform directly to the advertiselment J^idge, <=hl^?d<li1'l 'HTR^f Tt 'fe^t <rsi^i< ^3Tf^Ra^T the requirement, eligibility and other form. ^ar that earlier normal practice was that |at the time of main examinatjon not at i, therefore, under that impression the ^ertificate has no merit. The petitioner irtisement carefully. It is common }i jnviting the applications are always that is why the advertisements are |ng to apply should read carefully and t, that is why the advertisement >, Class-11, was issued thrice. The litied under wrong impression based on |Some time even qualifications are cllanged and other conditions are also pnd any substance in the argument t|iat the Government employees have lire|ctly with an intimation to theiremployer agarding their status as Government |the advertisement, which relates to the that they were allowed to send the Re^istry. It has further been made clear [Tft^ ^Ra^ ~r- .^^^ 32- XI-HC-22 ^~ST ^l<4ld<LI, ^Ti1<i^<o, [^<ni<-ill< 3^?T X15^ _...u.t:'..:.^.^; ^l*1Crtl 5b*1ich 200 I^^T' 3^?T'^T r<vii<=h 'sn^r 5^^ich <if^a 37T^T'^TT8;TT ^rit^T that if any applicant sends the appl| if it reaches late to the Registry th^n and will not be considered. It hi employees were required to send Head of the Department regarding has also been mentioned that late^ the employer regarding disallowi| examination, his application shall claiming relaxation in age being ah from the Government employees. candidates cannot be treated on tht petitioner cannot claim immunity tc| age. Mr. Ali Asgar also argued th< annexed with the return filed by th^ forms were rejected being over ag|e not aware about filing of the I do not find any substance course, in the statement it has beeh 377 candidates of SC, ST & OBC wt not show that all these applications submission of certificates. There rr| have crossed the age limit even aft^i certific^tes <=bl^(d<iflr1 TTW^if Tt ft^ <f^^i< ^ 3>Tf^FT 3^T fcation form through the employer and same will be treated as time barred |is further been mentioned that such |in intimation in writing to their Office/ (heir submission of application form. It on, if any intimation is received from ig the employee to appear in the |be rejected. Case of the petitioner i|i OBC candidate is entirely different 'he Government employees and OBC i^ same footing and on that count, the send the certificate for relaxation of |it the statementof the rejected forms ^ respondent indicates that in att 377 l|e, it shows that the candidates were ^ iji this argument for the reason that of mentioned that application forms of r^re rejected being over age, that does t/vere rejected only on account of non- (ay be cases in which the candidates t^r relaxation or even if those number [T?t^ ^Psi^ ;^^;, |a-HC-22; ^; 10 \^^ ^-~' ^-e'' ^[T^T^T f^ri^^ni^T 5b^lcf> ffl^T Soma -^sr ^IMH^ ^nl^^Ko, f^<ni^i< a^r xi^ ^ _.M:S>.1^^^°L .•_ ^l^crll sb^icb •fN^sr' STT^T'^n^R^Tf^T ct')i^(<n^lri '^T^ff ^ i^St <Fai<^i< '^3rrf^TH3TT^T of candidates have not submitted flhe certificates that do not entitle them to accept their forms without subijnission of the certificates, particularly when there is an indication in the |application form regarding submission of certificate for relaxation of age. As far as the argument that Ihere was no clear cut indication in the advertisement that in case the cert|ficateis not submitted, the application form shall be rejected, the manrl published that for relaxation of ag^ the certificate is sufficient to indiclate that in case the certificate is not submitted, then automatically th| relaxation in age and necessary i| formwill be rejected. In this resri advertisement which is in the form him to fill up the form carefully, it e| filled and in case of incomplete o| shall be responsibte for that and th^ For the foregoing reasons, 1 is devoid of merit, same is liabll dismissed, atthe admission stagei^ Consequently, I.A.Nos.1 & 3 ler in which the condition has been ^, the candidate is required to submit |e candidate shall not be allowed tnplication will be that his application ^ect, if we look into clause 19 ofthe ^>f warning to every applicant requiring ^ivisages that full particularsshould be ^ defective information, the candidate form shatl be liable to be rejected. |im of the opinion that this writ petition ^ to be dismissed and it is hereby Iself. No order as to costs. ^tand disposed of. _-———~^" Sd/- L.C.Bbadoo Judge [^^fe^