DIVYA KALIA v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

CWP-23835

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

Divya Kalia State of Haryana and others

CORAM:

Present:

SUMEET GOEL

1.

Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) 2024, the petitioner has sought for grant of a writ for her appointment as Civil Judge (Junior Division) in the State of Ha

2.

lis in hand is adumbrated (i)

referred to as '

Haryana Pub

'HPSC')

-2024

CHANDIGARH

V/s

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Mr. Anand Chhibbar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shreya B. Sarin, Advocate and Mr. Himanshu Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Addl. Advocate Gener for respondent Nos.1, 4 & 5.

Mr. Sukhdeep Singh Chhatwal, Advocate for Mr. Ajaivir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2 Mr. Balvinder Singh Sangwan, Advocate for respondent No.3-HPSC.

*****

, JUDGE

Taking exception to the rejection of her candidature in the Shorn of non-essential details, the relevant factual matrix of the , thus:

Vide Advertisement dated 01.01.2024

advertisement in question'

lic Service Commission (

advertised the vacancies of Civil Judge (Junior Division)in the

1

CWP-23835-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.03.202

....Petitioner ....Respondents al, Haryana -High Court. Examination for the year 2023 ryana.

(hereinafter to be

) the respondent No.3 namely hereinafter to be referred to as

5

-

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

1 of 21

State of Haryana. The relevant Clauses of the read thus:

referred to as 'Clause

referred to as 'Clause

referred to as 'Clause

-2024

Clause 1 of the advertisement in 1') reads thus:

"1. CANDIDATES TO ENSURE THEIR ELIGIBILITY FOR THE EXAMINATION: The Candidates applying for the examination should ensure that they fulfill all eligibility conditions for admission to the examination. Their admission to all the stage of the examination will be purely provisional subject to satisfying the prescribed eligibility conditions. Mere issue of e-Admit Card to the candidate will not imply that his/her candidature has been finally

Commission takes up verification of eligibility conditions with reference to original documents only after the candidate

Examination/Interview/Personality Test.

Note: The decision of the Commi

otherwise of a candidate for admission to the Examination, shall be final." Clause 3 of the advertisement in question

3') reads thus:

"3. LAST DATE FOR RECEIPT OF

The online Applications can be submitted upto The candidates shall be issued an e commencement of the Examination. The e available on the official website of the Commission for downloading by the candidates. No Admit Card will be sent by post.

Clause 9 of the advertisement in question

9') reads thus:

"9. Plan of Examination:

xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx Note:

The candidates will have to upload the scanned documents/certificates in support of date of brith, category {viz.

2

advertisement in question question (hereinafter to be cleared by the Commission. The has qualified for Main Written ssion with regard to the eligibility or (hereinafter to be

APPLICATIONS:

31.01.2024 till 11:55 PM.

-Admit Card well before the -Admit Card will be made (hereinafter to be xxx xxx

xxx xxx

xxx xxx

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

2 of 21

referred to as 'Clause referred to as 'Clause referred to as 'Clause

-2024

SC/BCA/BCB/EWS/ESM/DESM/DFF/PwBD} and all educational certificates at the time while applying online for the above posts. The category/caste

should have been issued during the year 2023

instructions issued by the Haryana Government in this regard. Further, these certificates should be valid for the year 2023 The BC-A/BC-B certificates should b

Haryana Govt. Instructions dated 17.11.2021 & 22.03.2022. The EWS certificate must show the annual income of the family less than Rs.6 lacs as per Govt. Instructions dated 25.02.2019." Clause 28 of the advertisement in question 28') reads thus:

" xxx xxx xxx xxx

ii) The decision of the Commission as to the eligibility or otherwise of a candidate for admission to the Examination shall be final. xxx xxx

xxx xxx

Clause 29 of the advertisement in question

29') reads thus:

"29 RESERVATION

i. The benefit of reservation will be given only to those SC/BC B/PwBD/ESM/EWS category candidates who are

State.

xxx xxx

xxx xxx

Clause 30 of the advertisement in question

30') reads thus:

"30 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

xxx xxx xxx xxx

vii) Due care should be taken by the candidates while filling up the online application form. Incomplete or defective application form will be summarily rejected. No representation or correspondence regarding such rejection shall be entertained under any circumstances.

3

certificates for BCA/BCB/EWS/DESM -24 as per latest

e issued according to

(hereinafter to be

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx"

(hereinafter to be

-A/BC

domicile of Haryana

xxx

xxx"

(hereinafter to be

xxx

xxx

-24.

-

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided y HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

3 of 21

referred to as 'Clause (ii)

form, as a Scheduled Caste Candidate Candidate')

advertisement in question Certificate dated 11.07.2016 (hereinafter referre 11.07.2016').

on 03.03.2024 and upon

examination which was conducted from 12.07.2024 to 14.07.2024. schedule of

interviewed on 15.09.2024.

(iii)

HPSC, relevant whereof reads as under:

-2024

xxx xxx xxx xxx Clause 36 of the advertisement in question 36') reads thus:

"xxx xxx xxx xxx

v) The hard copy of application form along with all uploaded documents must be brought at the time when called upon to do so by the Commission. No document(s) which has/have not been uploaded shall be entertained.

xxx xxx

xxx xxx

The petitioner is stated to have submi

, on 24.01.2024 i.e. within the time stipulated in the

. The petitioner submitted her Scheduled Caste The petitioner further appeared for the preliminary examination passing the same, she cleared the main written viva voce was issued and the petitioner was slated to be On 05.09.2024, the petitioner received an

"Kindly refer to your online application form for the post cited the subject. On checking/scrutiny of your online application form to adjudge your eligibility, your candidature has found provisionally liable for rejection due to the following reasons:

1. You have attached the certificate of SC category dated 11.07 without registration number & date.

2. You have not attached the domicile of Haryana.

4

xxx xxx" (hereinafter to be xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx"

tted the online application (hereinafter referred to as 'SC d to as 'SC Certificate dated

T

intimation from -

.2016

he

as

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decid d by HON'BLE T E CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

4 of 21

(iv) e-mail, that her requisite caste certificate a already been submitted but, somehow, the registration number and date was missing from

with the HPSC

petitioner was correct

Scheduled Caste Certificate

The petitioner also sought for a clarification regarding the genuineness of her SC certificate dated 11.07.20

No.4 herein) and the said

authority.

(v)

'impugned

(vi)

petition in hand was

of interim relief, relevant whereof reads as under:

-2024

If you have any objection against the rejection, you can submit your representation along with documentary proof through e SR5-hpsc@hry.gov.in upto 07.09.2024 till 04:00 PM, failing which no representation will be entertained by the Commission and your candidature will be finally rejected.

On 05.09.2024 itself; the petitioner informed her SC certificate dated 11.07.2016.

that the SC certificate dated 11.07.2016

one and the same had been issued on the basis of of her father which dated back to 11.07.1991. 16from Tehsildar, Gurugram (respondent

certificate was

She informed HPSC about it as well.

Vide order dated 12.09.2024

order') HPSC rejected the candidature of the petitioner This Court had passed an

under consideration,

"xxxxxxx In the meanwhile, petitioner be permitted to participate provisionally in the interview/viva

from 13.09.2024 to 29.09.2024. It is made clear that participation in this interview shall not vest the petitioner with any ri

selection and is completely subject to decision of this writ petition. Her result be kept in sealed cover.

xxxxxxxx."

5

-mail i.e.

" HPSC, by way of s also the domicile certificate had The petitioner pleaded

submitted by the

found to be genuine by the said (hereinafter referred to as

.

order dated 18.09.2024 while the in the hands of this Court, for grant -voce which it is stated is being held ght whatsoever for

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

5 of 21

(vii) come up for

Rival contentions

3.

Senior Advocate; have argued that the petitioner is a candidate and had submitted the requisite terms of the

the non-mentioning of the date and

certificate dated 11.07.2016

has, thus, been urged that all that the petitioner could have done was to seek a certificate from the concerned authorities, which she in thereafter submitted the same

counsel has further iterated that, onc

clarification regarding the

promptly given by the petitioner and thus she cannot be fastened with any adverse consequence

certificate

(Tehsildar Gurugram) and thus there was no cause with the the candidature of the petitioner.

hand is entreated for.

4.

caused appearance through counsel.

4.1.

raised submission

-2024

It is in this factual backdrop, that the present writ petition has receiving final consideration

Learned counsel for the petitioner; led by Sh

advertisement in question.

registration number upon the

, was not within the control of the petitioner. It , for the

SC certificate

in this regard. It has been further submitted that the dated 11.07.2016 has been found to be valid by respondent No.4 On strength of these submissions,

In response to notice of motion by this Court, respondents Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1, 4 and 5 has s in tandem with a short reply by way of affidavit of Ms

6

at the hands of this Court.

. Anand Chhibbar, bona fide SC category SC certificate with regard to the Learned counsel has iterated that, -fact did and

examination in question. Learned e the HPSC has sought for a dated 11.07.2016, the same was HPSC to reject

the grant of writ petition in

SC

SC

.

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

6 of 21

Shikha, Tehsildar, Gurugram. The gravamen of th SC certificate

concerned State authority(s) is vali said certificate

4.2.

No.2-High Court. Court has

present lis substantial role in

4.3.

Kumar, Deputy Secretary, Haryana Public Service Commission. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3, while raising submission in tandem with the said short reply, has submitted that the

responsibility upon the candidates for ensuring their eligibility by submitting the requisite documents. Learned counsel has further

upon Clause 30

prescribes that the incomplete or

summarily rejected and thus there arises no cause with the petitioner to now rectify the error. Learned counsel has further argued that the stipulations provided in the

with equal vigour to one and all with no scope for relaxation therein. Learned counsel has

with the requisite stipulations, is bound to invite adverse consequences. Learned counsel has furth

submitted documents etc

dated 11.07.2016

-2024

dated 11.07.2016 issued in favour of the petitioner by the d and it has also been admitted that the

was not numbered.

No written reply has been submitted on behalf of respondent Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 iterated that the HPSC is the recruiting agency and, insofar as the is concerned, the respondent No.2 does not have any effective or adjudication thereof.

Respondent No.3-HPSC has filed a short reply by Shri Satish to iterate that the advertisement in question

defective application form will be

advertisement in question

, thus, pressed that any candidate who

er urged that the petitioner could not have, later on,

. in support of the genuineness and thus her candidature has rightly been rejected. On the

7

is short reply is that the -High

Clause 1 casts

strenuously relied clearly

carry the force of law and apply has not complied

of the SC certificate

a

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Deci ed by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

7 of 21

strength of these submissions, learned counsel a No.3 has sought for dismissal of the writ petition in hand.

5.

perused the record.

Prime issue

6.

in hand is wrongly rejected by the be afforded to the petitioner. candidature of an aspirant in a selection/examination process, who is otherwise eligible

on account of inadvertent submission of

which is sought to be substituted by

subsequent to the cut

process.

Relevant Statut

7.

-2024

We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and have The prime issue that arises for consideration in the writ petition , as to whether the petitioner's candidature as a HPSC. In case it is found so, what relief(s)

The seminal legal issue that arises for

, ought to be rejected by the selecting/examining agency a correct/complete certificate at a stage

-off-date for applying to such selection/examination

e

Article 226 of the Constitution of India

"226. Power of High Courts to issue certain writs

anything in article 32, every High Court shall have powers, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercise jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including i

within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warrantor and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.

(2) xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

(3) xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

(4) xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

8

ppearing for respondent SC candidate, was ought to

cogitation is whether the an irregular/incomplete certificate reads as under:

.-- (1)Notwithstanding n appropriate cases, any Government,

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

8 of 21

Relevant Case Law

8.

follows:

(i)

Mathew and others,

under:-

(ii)

Shekhar,

Supreme Court

-2024

The precedents, apropos to the In a judgment titled as Charles K. Skaria and others vs. Dr. C. 1980 AIR 1230,the Hon'ble Supreme Court

"20. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. the possession of a diploma before the given date; what is ancillary is the safe mode of proof of the qualification. To confuse between proof is blurred perspicacity. To make mandatory the date of acquiring the additional qualification before t

sense. But if it is unshakeably shown that the qualification has been acquired before the relevant date, as is the case here, to invalidate this merit factor because proof, though indubitable, was adduced a few days later but before the selection or in a manner not mentioned in the prospectus, but still above board, is to make procedure not the hand made but the mistress and form not as subservient to substance but as superior to the essence.

In a judgment titled as Ashok Kumar Sharma vs. Chander AIRONLINE 1997 SC 700,a T

has held as under:-

"6. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Th applications are called for prescribing a particular date as for fling the applications, the eligibility of the candidates shall have to be judged with reference to that date and that date alone, is a well established one. A person who acquires the prescribed qualification subsequent to such prescribed

advertisement or notification issued/published calling for applications constitutes a representation to the public and the authority issuing it is bound by such representation. It cannot act contrary to it. One reason behind this proposition is that if it were known that persons who obtained the qualifications after the prescribed date but before the date of interview would be allowed to appear for the interview

persons could also have applied. J

9

matter(s) in issue, are as has held as

What is essential a fact and its

he last date for application makes hree Judge Bench of the Hon'ble e proposition that where the last date

date cannot be considered at all. An ; other similarly placed

ust because some of the persons had is

-

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

9 of 21

(iii)

others 2004 AIR Supreme Court 5043

Supreme Court (iv)

Khan and others, 2011(1

under:-

-2024

applied notwithstanding that they had not acquired the prescribed qualifications by the prescribed date, they could not have been treated on a preferential basis. Their application

inception itself. This proposition is indisputable and in fact was not doubted or disputed in the majority

judgment.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" In a judgment titled as Dolly Chhanda vs. Chairman, JEE , a T

has held as under:-

"7. The general rule is that while applying for any course of study or a post, a person must possess the eligibility qualification on the last date fixed for such purpose either in the

form, as the case may be, unless there is an express provision to the contrary. There can be no relaxation in this regard i.e. in the matter of holding the requisite eligibility qualification by the date fixed. This ha be established by producing the necessary certificates, degrees or mark sheets. Similarly, in order to avail of the benefit of reservation or weightage, etc. necessary certificates have to be produced. These are documents in the nature of proof of hol

percentage of marks secured or entitlement

Depending upon the facts of a case, there can be some relaxation in the matter of submission of proof and it will not be proper to apply any rigid principle as it pertains in the domain of procedure. Every infraction of the rule relating to submission of proof need not necessarily result in rejection of candidature."

In a judgment titled as Bedanga Talukdar vs. Saifudaullah

2) SCC 85, the Hon'ble Supreme Court

"28. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. too well settled to need any further reiteration that all appointments to public office have to be made in conformity with

Constitution of India. In other words, there must be no arbitrariness resulting from any undue favour being shown to any candidate. Therefore, the selection process has to be conducted stri

stipulated selection procedure. Consequently, when a particular schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the same has to be scrupulously maintained. There can not be any relaxation in the terms and conditions of the advertisement unless such a power is

10

s ought to have been rejected at the

and

hree Judge Bench of the Hon'ble admission brochure or in application ding of particular qualification or to benefit of reservation. has held as

In our opinion, it is

Article 14 of the

ctly in accordance with the specifically reserved. Such a s to

-

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

10 of 21

(v)

Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr.

COURT 1098,

-2024

power could be reserved in the relevant Statutory Rules. Even if power of relaxation is provided in the rules, it must still be mentioned in the advertisement. In the absence of such power in the Rul provided in the advertisement. However, the power of relaxation, if exercised has to be given due publicity. This would be necessary to ensure that those candidates who become eligible due to the relaxation, are afforded an equal opportunity to apply and compete. condition in advertisement without due publication would be contrary to the mandate of quality contained in

of India."

In a judgment titled as

the Hon'ble Supreme Court

"15. xxx xxx Xxx xxx

18. While taking a particular view in such matters one has to keep in mind the objectives behind the post of SC and ST categories as per constitutional mandate prescribed in 15(4) and 16(4) which are enabling provisions authorising the Government to make special provisions for the persons of SC and ST categories. Articles 14(4)

remove social and economic inequality to make equal opportunities available in reality. Social and economic justice is a right enshrined for protection of society. The right i economic justice envisaged in the Preamble and elongated in the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of the Constitution, in particular Arts. 14, 15, 16, 21, 38, 39 and 46 are to make the quality of the life of the poor, disadvantaged a of the society meaningful.

16. In our considered view, the decision rendered in the case of Pushpa (supra) is in conformity with the position of law by this Court, which have been referred to supra. the High Court erred in reversing the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge, without noticing the binding question laid down by the Constitution Benches of this Court in the cases of Indra Sawhney and Valsamma Paul

interpretation of Articles 14,15,16 and 39A of the Directive Principles of State Policy held that the object of providing reservation to the SC/ST and educationally and socially backward classes of the society is to remove inequality in public employment, as candidates belonging to these

11

es, it could still be Relaxation of any Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution

Ram Kumar Gijroya vs. Delhi

AIR 2016 SUPREME

has held as under:-

xxx xxx

xxx xxx

Articles

and 16(4), therefore, intend to n social and

nd disabled citizens

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. laid down

The Division Bench of precedent on the

(supra) wherein this Court after

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 D cided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

11 of 21

(vi)

Delhi and Ors.

Three Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (vii)

2024(1) SCC 448,

-2024

categories are unable to compete with the candidates belonging to the general category as a result of facing centuries of oppression and deprivation of opportunity. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. In a judgment titled as Karn Singh Yadav vs. Govt. of NCT of

in SLP (C) No.14948 of 2016,

"It must be stated here that an identical fact situation consideration before this Court in Ram

Subordinate Services Selection Board &

wherein this Court ruled in favour of the concerned candidate. The instant matter is thus completely covered by said decision. However, it must be noted here that as a result of cancellation of the candidature, the appellant was never appointed to the post in question and at this length in time, it will not be possible to grant any substantial relief to the appellant."

In a judgment titled as Divya vs. Union of India & Ors.

the Hon'ble Supreme Court

"43. In Charles K. Skaria (supra), most candidates possessed the eligibility viz. the diploma. Only the proof in the form of certificate was awaited. The authorities had also accepted them as eligible, expressly informing the selection committee that for eligible candidates even if proof came later and before the final selection, it should be considered as valid. This was also equally the situation in

Kumar Singh (supra) and Dheerender Singh Paliwal (supra) where the factual position about the eligibility was not in dispute. Those cases and the cases of that ilk cannot support the petitioners in this case for the purpose of claiming eligibility in CSE

44. xxxxxxxx

45. xxxxxxxx

46. It is also very well settled that if there are relevant rules which prescribe the date on which the eligibility should be possessed, those rules will prevail. In the absence of rules or any other date prospectus/advertisement for determining the eligibility, there is a judicial chorus holding that it would be the last date for submission of the application. (See Rekha Chaturvedi v. Un

12

decided on 28.09.2022 has held as under:-

came up for

Kumar Gijroya v. Delhi Another, (2016) 4 SCC 754, has held as under:-

Dolly Chhanda (supra), Alok -2022 as an EWS candidate. prescribed in the

iversity of Rajasthan [1993

"

, a

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

12 of 21

Analysis (re law)

9.

possess the requisite mandatory qualification(s) as on the The Three Judge Bench judgment of Hon'ble Supreme

Kumar Sharma

that the eligibility of a candidate is required to be reference to the cut

requisite prescri

renders himself ineligible and cannot be shown any relaxation unless the extant rules so provide

pertinently required to

concerned selecting/examining agency

them subsequently would not render such

would incur

certificate(s) etc. at the time of submitting his

be permitted to rectify such certificate(s).

is starkly distinct

-2024 Supp (3) SCC 168]; Bhupinderpal Singh v. State of Punjab SCC 262]; Ashok Kumar Sonkar v. Union of India

xxx xxx xxx xxx

53. Quite apart from the above, much water has also flown under the bridge. The UPSC has made the cadre allocations and the EWS candidates against the 298 vacancies have also been allotted their respective cadres. Today, it is legally not permissible and administratively not feasible for the UPSC to unscramble the egg. Accepting the contention of the petitioners would also result in administrative chaos and will prolong the selection process indefinit

It is trite law that a candidate, seeking public employment, must (supra) and Bedanga Talukdar

-off-date and that date alone. A person, who acquires the bed qualification, subsequent

. As a pivotal imperative pre possess the mandatory , on the

in consequential penal effect(s). The general rule, thus, is that a candidate must deposit all requisite However,

from the proof thereof. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

13

[(2000) 5

[(2007) 4 SCC 54]

xxx xxx xxx xxx ely.

prescribed cut-off-date. Court in the case of Ashok

(supra) unequivocally enunciates adjudged with scrupulous to such a prescribed cut-off date, -requisite thereof, a candidate is qualification(s), as sought for by t cut-off-date; whereas, acquiring a candidate eligible& failure therein application form and he ought not to possession of a qualification

.

he

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decid d by ON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

13 of 21

ofCharles K. Skaria

qualification before the concerned date and mode of proof thereof Following this

(supra), Ram Kumar Gijroya

carved out certificate/testimonial with a technical defect/irregularity, which was beyond the reasonable

jurisprudence that

each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. Procedural and technical hurdles ought not to be allowed to stand in the way of substantial justice. It must be grasped that the concept of substantial on account of its power to legalize

with a sceptre

out and is expected to do so.

to anyone else, the concept of substantial justice requires that the Courts/authorities must lean towards

procedural and technical violations.

stand in opposition, the former must invariably prevail, for justice is not a m mechanical exercise but a

judgments

the submission of irregular/technically defective certificate(s) procedural lapse(s) which may be condoned

common denominator

correct requisite certificate(s) were allowed to be submitted belatedly, such candidate did actually possess such qualification

words, the Apex Court has enunciated that such certificate(s)

-2024

(supra) has held that what is essential is the possession of a dicta; the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of (supra) and

exception(s) when it relates to submission of a control of such candidate

when substantial and technical co

an otherwise

nay SENGOL on technical grounds

If the procedural violation does not cause prejudice effectuating

When substanti

tangible pursuit of truth & fairness.

, essentially, grants a latitude to the

, which runs through these decisions is that, e

14

, is ancillary

Dolly Chhanda Karan Singh Yadav (supra); (s). It is an unshaken canon of our nsiderations are pitted against justice is respected not

injustice configured so endowed ; but because it is for striking justice rather than relying upon al & procedural considerations The dicta of these

reserved category aspirants, treating , being essentially

, in view of the facts involved. The ven when

on the cut-off-date. In other /testimonial(s) were

.

has ere

For Subsequent or ers s e CM-6520-CWP-2025 Deci ed by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

14 of 21

proof of an attribute which the candidate already possessed of was not attained after the cut

certificate(s) are

authority(s) and a candidate does not have any say issuance thereof.

candidate to obtain requisite certificate

from the concerned authority.

issued by the concerned competent authority is, thus, beyond the control of an aspirant. Actual excellence

be obliterated by the choice of an orthodox

Equity ought to

realm of writ jurisdiction, courts are duty bound to uphold the paramount cause of substantial justice, ensuring that the dispensation of justice is not thwarted by mere technicalities

ensure orderly adjudication, they must never be exalted to the extent that they eclipse the

cause of justice

power to prevent miscarriage of justice arising from rigid adherence to procedural formalities.

liberal and pragmatic approach, ensuring that

substance. A constitutional court, vested with extra

therefore, eschew hyper

justice, for the law must ever remain a handmaiden to justice & not an instrument of oppression or procedural entanglement.

-2024

-off-date. Judicial notice can well be taken by this Court that, such , more often than not, issued at the end of the In actual life, it is often exasperatingly cumbersome for a nay one issued in the

A technical irregularity/defect in such certificate or even basic eligibility

overpower technicality where

. While procedural considerations serve as necessary safeguards to fundamental tenets of fairness, equity and justice

. The Court, as a sentinel of Equity, being the soul of justice, demands that -technical reasoning and focus on the broader ends of

15

and such attribute reservation

concerned

nay authoritative say in exact prescribed form , thus, cannot be permitted to interpretation of law and procedure. the justice so demands. In the or even moribund the

justice, must wield its discretionary the courts adopt a

the form does not triumph over -ordinary jurisdiction, must, (s)

the

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

15 of 21

10.

scenario, submission of correct/technical error free certificate(s) after the last date of depositing of application form having passed,

looming large in the selection/e

culmination thereof

in support thereof

condoned

required to be submitted have to be

concerned before submission thereof.

omission(s) on his part as the selecting/examining agency has to proceed on the basis of application and documents submitted by

has occurred on account of circumstances beyond the control of the ap namely, an incorrect/technically defective certificate(s) from the competent authority,

drop of such

latitude may be extend

candidate to show good cause

corrective or

candidate, at the

any such latitude as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of latitude for submission of an

application form

at the earliest opportunity

-2024

A conundrum faced by the selecting/examining agency seeks attention, namely; granting latitude to the candidate(s) for xamination process

.

A candidate, while making an application and submitting documents , indubitably ought to be diligent and

as has been in the case of Divya

scrupulously A candidate can having been presented by the candidate a candidate actually possessing able to such a candidate.

, with certitude,

remedial steps ought to be undertaken at the end of earliest feasible date, since the

Ergo; the conundrum is set at naught; incorrect/defective certificate alongwith the is required to show tangible cause or accentuating circumstances, lest the timeline itself

16

in such a poses a threat of uncertainty , as also may cause delay in any laxity ought not to be (supra). Document(s)/certificate(s) checked by the candidate

not be afforded latitude for the candidate. In case an error plicant,

, received by the candidate , in the back

the requisite qualification, some It is indubitable that it is for for grant of such a latitude. Also, the concerned

time lapse may, by itself proscribe

Divya (supra). viz, a candidate seeking may non-suit such candidate. No

,

the

For Subsequent ord rs se CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

16 of 21

exhaustive set of such circumstances alluring this aspect may be. It is neither fathomable nor desirable to straight jacket formula in this regard. Any attempt in this case would be, to say the least,

different fact, may make a sea of

Such exercise would thus, indubitably, be dependent upon the factual matrix of a particular lis,

Analysis (

11.

response to the

11.07.2016

concerned comp basis of

14.05.2012.

basis of a S of the petitioner. Two fold objections were raised by the communication dated 05.09.2024 i.e.

11.07.2016

domicile certificate of the petitioner for the State of Haryana was not attached.

the registration number as also date is not mentioned on the top thereof but

11.07.2016. Hence, the objection raised by

of date on the top left side of the

logic. It is a trivial error and law does

-2024

/cause(s) quixotic endeavour. Circumstantial fl difference between conclusions in two cases. since every case has its own peculiar factual cons

re facts of the present case)

The petitioner, while laying forth her claim as a advertisement in question

which clearly stipulates that such certificate etent authority, namely, the Tehsildar, an earlier SC certificate issued

It also further reflects that the certificate ha cheduled Caste certificate date

did not have any registration number and d A perusal of the SC Certificate dated 11.07.2016 on the bottom left side of the same SC Certificate

not concern itself with trifles as per

17

can possibly be laid down however lay down any

exibility, one additional or pectus.

SC Candidate,

submitted her SC Certificate dated was issued by the

Gurugram on the

in favour of the petitioner d been issued on the

d 14.07.1976 issued to the father HPSC vide

firstly the SC Certificate dated ate &, secondly,

reflects that

left side

, the date is mentioned as HPSC regarding non-mentioning dated 11.07.2016 is sans in

on

the

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Deci ed by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

17 of 21

salutary legal principle enshrined in the maxim Further, by no stretch of imagination, the non number on the top left side of the attributed

(Tehsildar of Gurugram in the present case number. Further, the factum of non the SC Certificate

respondent

authority (Tehsildar, Gurugram).

14.05.2012 issued in favour of the petitioner, which forms the basi issuance of the

competent authority.

the case in hand that the requisite domicile certificate was, in fact, uploaded by the petitione

sought to be taken by

which calls for rejection for justice must not be shackled by the chains of formality.

11.1

was rejected, was issued on 12.09.2024. The petitioner drafted the writ petition in hand on

up for preliminary hearing before this Court on 18.09.2024 wherein an interim order was extended in favour of the petitioner provisionally participate in the viva

be said that the petitioner's plea can be

Further, it emerged as

rival parties during the course of arguments, that pursuant to the interim

-2024

SC Certificate to the petitioner as it was for the concerned competent authority, -mentioning of registration number on

dated 11.07.2016 has been conceded in the stand of s No.1, 4 and 5 which includes the said concerned competent Still further, the SC certificate dated

SC Certificate dated 11.07.2016

It clearly further emanates from the fac

r in terms of the advertisement in question. The refuge, HPSC, under clauses 28, 30 & 26

The impugned order, whereby

or around 13.09.2024 and the same came

-voce.

a common ground between the learned counsel for

18

De Minimus Non Curat Lex. -mentioning of registration dated 11.07.2016 can be ), to mention the registration s of the

has been vouchsafed by the tual matrix of

is actually subterfuge the candidature of the petitioner appears to have got

, permitting her to

In this factual back drop, it cannot proscribed as being time barred.

For Subsequent orders se CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

18 of 21

order dated 18.09.2024 passed by this Court, the petitioner actually appeared for the viva

appointed.

11.2

hand; especially the factum of no fault being attributable to the petitioner in the format (date and registration number) of the requisite SC certificate concerned competent authority (Tehsildar, Gurugram) ratifying the veracity of the SC certificate

being solely at the end of the concerned competent authority in issuing the SC certificate dated 1

number and date, the petitioner pursuing her legal right expeditiously and diligently & the contumacious rationale sought to be employed by justifying the rejection of the petitioner's candidature; the quashing of the impugned order would serve the cause of complete

restitutive justice.

12.

craves atte instrumentalities) the temptation to oppose the claims indiscriminately. The State exercise due diligence in distinguishing be

claim. While it is justified in defending itself against spurious claims, this duty must be discharged with a sense of responsibility. The Constitutional framework envisions the State as a Welfare State, which is inherentl obligated to act in the best interest of its citizens. In litigation involving the State and its citizens, this welfare

conduct. Unlike a private litigant, whose sole objective is often to secure a

-2024

-voce and has achieved the requisite thresh Keeping in view the entirety of the fa dated 11.07.2016 of the petitioner, the fault (if any) 1.07.2016of the petitioner without a registration Before parting with this order, another aspect of the ntion. In discharging its role as a litigant, the State must adopt a balanced and judicious approach, resisting -oriented ethos must guide the State's

19

old marks for being ctual matrix of the case in , the

HPSC

nay substantial and lis in hand

(as also its

must

tween a baseless and a legitimate for

y

For Subsequent r ers see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

19 of 21

favourable judgmen justice is served, consistent with the principles of fairness and equity. exception

constitute a serious menace to the administration of justice. They consume time and clog the overburdened infrastructure. Productive resources, which should be deployed in the handling of genuine causes, are dissipated in pursuing worthless

the largest litigant today and the huge expenditure involved makes a big draft on the public exchequer. The present case is an of, how litigations are pursued on behalf of t

precise, in the case in hand

The proceedings reveal a lack of due diligence, reflective of an apathetic approach that undermines the principles of responsible governance & judicial propriety. Such conduct reflects an absence of serious application of mind, resulting in an unwarranted litigation that burdens the judicial system. This tendency can be curbed only if the Courts across the system adopt an institutional approach which p

costs, is a necessary instrument, which has to be deployed to weed out, such an unscrupulous conduct. Ergo, this Court deems it appropriate to saddle HPSC with costs, which indubitably ought to be veritable and nature.

Decision

13.

is disposed of,

-2024

t, the State bears a higher responsibility to ensure that The Courts across the legal system

— are choked with litigation. Frivolous and ground cause(s). In our jurisprudential eco

), in a totally mechanical and indifferent fashion. enalizes such comportment. The imposition of In view of the preceding ratiocination, the writ petition in hand in following terms:

20

— this Court being not an less dispute(s)

-system, the State is unsoothing illustration he State (HPSC, to be more real time in

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

20 of 21

(i) candidature of the petitioner has been rejected quashed. Respondents are mandated to take, forthwith, requisite consequential steps accordingly.

(ii)

within two weeks from today. Exemplary costs of Rs.1,00,0 saddled upon

Fund PGIMER, Chandigarh

precious time of this Court which could have been utilized for hearing & deciding more pressing matters. Liberty is

recover the costs, in accordance with law, from the concerned erring Official(s).

(iii)

14.

affidavit(s) from today, failing which they may law) for themselves as also their concerned functionaries

05.05.2025

(SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE

March 20 Ajay/Naveen

-2024

The impugned order dated HPSC is directed to pay to the petitioner costs of Rs.50,000/ HPSC to be deposited in favour of Poor Patient's Welfare within two weeks from today

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of. The respondent-authorities are directed to file compliance , in terms of the directions made hereinabove, within four weeks invite punitive consequences (as per

for consideration of such compliance

, 2025

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Whether reportable:

21

12.09.2024 (whereby the by respondent-HPSC) 00/- is further for having wasted reserved in favour of the HPSC

. Be put up on -affidavit(s).

(SHEEL NAGU)

CHIEF JUSTICE

Yes Yes is

-

to

-

For Subsequent orders see CM-6520-CWP-2025 Decided by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE

21 of 21