Introduction
In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble Sri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and the Hon’ble Dr. Justice Shameem Akther addressed W.P. No. 9532 of 2017, a writ petition filed to challenge the selection process for Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constables (Communication) by the State Level Police Recruitment Board. The petitioner claimed reservation under the B.C.-E non-creamy layer category but failed to secure a place in the final merit list, leading to the filing of this writ petition.
Background of the Case
The State Level Police Recruitment Board issued a notification for 494 posts of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constables (Communication) with post code No.25. The petitioner applied for the posts under the B.C.-E non-creamy layer category, submitting relevant certificates, including a non-creamy layer certificate. Despite qualifying in physical measurement, physical efficiency tests, and the written test, the petitioner’s name was not included in the final merit list for the said category. Dissatisfied, the petitioner filed O.A. No. 609/2017 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. An interim order was passed, stating that the final selection in the B.C.-E category would be subject to the outcome of the original application.
The Writ Petition
Challenging the interim order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking relief through a Writ of Certiorari. The petitioner’s counsel argued that since the Tribunal had previously dismissed similar O.As., the petitioner’s fate before the Tribunal would likely be the same. The counsel sought to dispose of the writ petition on its merits, despite being filed against the interim order. The Government Pleader for Services (A.P.) did not oppose this course of action.
The Respondent’s Counter Affidavit
The Chairman of the State Level Police Recruitment Board filed a counter affidavit, contending that the petitioner had failed to produce the non-creamy layer certificate as required. The petitioner had submitted only four certificates, and despite the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool requesting the non-creamy layer certificate, the petitioner did not provide it. Consequently, the provisional selection list did not include the petitioner’s name under the B.C.-E non-creamy layer category, and the post was filled by an eligible candidate who provided the necessary documents.
The Court’s Decision
Despite the conflicting claims regarding the submission of the non-creamy layer certificate, the court observed that even if the petitioner had indeed submitted the certificate, it would not alter the outcome. The petitioner’s marks were lower than another candidate who secured 96 marks and was already selected for the post of Police Constable (Communications) under the B.C.-E non-creamy layer category. Additionally, the vacancy for this category had already been filled.
In light of the above, the court found no merit in the petitioner’s claim and dismissed the writ petition. No costs were awarded, and any pending miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Conclusion
The judgment in W.P. No. 9532 of 2017 reinforces the importance of fulfilling all required criteria in recruitment processes. The petitioner’s failure to submit the necessary non-creamy layer certificate and the presence of eligible candidates led to the dismissal of the writ petition. This ruling emphasizes the significance of adhering to the prescribed procedures and submitting all relevant documents to participate in fair and transparent recruitment procedures.
www.lawcrust.com