IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9901 of 2011 Bikash Kumar SON OF KISHORI SINGH RESIDNET OF DADHPI, P.S. GOH DISTRICT AURANGABAD. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar THROUGH D.G.P. BIHAR. 2. THE CENTRAL SELECTION BOARD OF CONSTABLES THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN, COMPUTER BHAWAN, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, THE CENTRAL SELECTION BOARD OF CONSTABLES, COMPUTER BHAWAN, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE COMMANDANT, BIHAR MILITARY POLICE-9, JAMALPUR, BIHAR. ---------------------------------- For the petitioner :- Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh For the State :- Mr. Amaresh Kumar, A.C. to G.P. XX For Respondent nos. 2 & 3:- M/S. Sanjay Pandey & Binod Kumar Mishra. ------ 2 06/09/2011 Petitioner was one of the persons who, no doubt, was successful both in the written examination as well as in the physical examination conducted by the Central Selection Board for recruitment on the post of constable but when he finally reported for joining before the Commandant, Bihar Military Police IX, Jamalpur, he was refused joining in terms of annexure-5 which is subject matter of challenge in the present writ application. From reading of annexure-5, it is evident that the petitioner was selected under the E.B.C. category on the - 2 - basis of declaration made by him but during the course of verification of original documents it was found that the petitioner had caste certificate of O.B.C. category (belonging to Kurmi caste). Since the caste certificate of the petitioner did not match with the declaration as well as the category under which petitioner came to be selected, the entire recommendation as well as the original records were returned to the competent authority. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that it was a plain human error committed by the petitioner and that should not come in the way of final appointment of the petitioner because he did not suppress the fact that he belongs to Kurmi community. While filling in the application form instead of marking 4 which should have rightly indicated the category under which he comes, he marked category no. 3 which belonged to E.B.C. category. Caste certificate issued to the petitioner indicates that he belongs to the O.B.C. category. The human error which has been committed is attributable to the petitioner. When lacs and lacs of - 3 - candidates are claimants claiming benefit of reservation under various categories, the authorities have to go by the declaration made by such candidates in their application form. They have no authority to change that declaration on the basis of the supporting document which may not indicate that they belong to the category under which they were claiming reservation. If there is a mismatch between the declaration made by the petitioner in his application and the caste certificate which he had produced, then he cannot be permitted to switch over to the category on the ground of human error because selection of the petitioner has been made from a vast number of claimants in the category he had sought recruitment. Allowing him benefit at this stage will surely have reflection upon every candidate who may or may not have been selected as the petitioner had been short listed and identified for selection on the basis of declaration made by him. Since the recruitments even otherwise have already been made and appointments carried out, no direction ought to be given at this stage, that too when the respondents are not at fault, in any manner, for the - 4 - predicament in which the petitioner lies today. The Court has sympathies but not the law in his favour. This writ application is dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)