Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment), Rules, 1955 – rr.7(b), 9 – Non-production of original certificate at the time of interview – Rejection of candidatures – Impermissible: Held: The language of the rules makes it clear that the production of the original certificates at the time of interview was not mandatory but directory – This is apparent from the language of second note to r.9 which uses the word “may be required to produce the originals before commission at the time of viva-voce test” – Further, even going by the advertisement, the certificates of educational qualification and other required documents on the date of the submission of the online application form were to be necessarily possessed but their production was not mandatory – The factum of eligibility is different from factum of proof thereof – If a person possesses eligibility before the date of actual selection, he cannot be denied benefit because its proof is produced later – In the present case, the proof was available and true photocopies were on record – Appellants’ candidature could not have been rejected merely because the original was not produced before the Commission at the time of interview in particular when such requirement was not mandatory – Further, the case of appellants is at par with the case of Aarav Jain and other seven candidates who were appointed in furtherance of the judgment of this Court dated 23.05.2022 in Aarav Jain v. The Bihar Public Service Commission and Ors. Civil Appeal No. 4242 of 2022 wherein this Court had not accepted the plea taken by BPSC that production of original certificate was mandatory because the candidates possessed such certificates on the date of submission of the application form – No reason to deny similar benefits to the two appellants at par with Aarav Jain and seven other candidates – Thus, they cannot be discriminated by not granting relief merely because of non-availability of vacancies in the 30th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examination – Further, in SLP (Civil) No. 16749/2023, the appellant appeared in 31st Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examination, and secured 501 marks, whereas cut off was 499 in EWS category therefore, the respondents to adjust one vacancy of EWS for the same examination or from the next examination and extend similar benefits to the said appellant, in view of the ratio of Aarav Jain – Impugned judgments set aside – Present judgment passed in the peculiar facts of the case. [Paras 14, 16-19, 22, 24, 27-29]
LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
Aarav Jain v. The Bihar Public Service Commission and Ors. Civil Appeal No. 4242 of 2022; Charles K. Skaria and Others vs. Dr. C. Mathew and Others (1980) 2 SCC 752:[1980] 3 SCR 71 – relied on. OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.