Dilwan
Singh & Ors Vs. State of Haryana & Ors [1996] INSC 450 (25 March 1996)
Ramaswamy,
K.Ramaswamy, K.G.B. Pattanaik (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (4) 248 1996 SCALE (3)553
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
WITH CIVIL
APPEAL NOS. 6888-90 OF 1996 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 21297-99 of 1994)
O R D
E R Though the respondents were served is SLP (C) No.21297- 99/94, respondents
1 and 4 appear through counsel. In respect of respondents 2 and 3, neither A.D.
Card nor unserved original notice have been received back. Under those circumstances,
they must be deemed to have been served.
Leave
granted.
It is
contended by Shri Mahabir Singh, learned counsel for the appellants that the
selection Board has adopted a policy of calling the ex-servicemen and the
dependent children of the ex-servicemen together to consider their cases for
recruitment according to merit which would stand an impediment to the
ex-servicemen. We find force in the contention. The object of reservation of
the ex-servicemen is to rehabilitate them after their discharge from the defence
services. As per the instructions issued by the State Government, in the
absence of availability of the ex- servicemen instead of keeping those posts
unfilled, the dependent children, namely, son or daughter of ex-servicemen
would also to be considered. The object thereby would be that the Selection
Board should first consider the claims of the ex-servicemen and have their
eligibility considered independently it the first instance before the claims of
the dependent children of the ex-servicemen are considered. If they are found
eligible and selected, for the balance unfilled posts, the selection should be
done from among the dependent children of the ex-servicemen.
The
other question that arises in this case is: whether the contesting respondents
have satisfied the requirement as dependants of the ex-servicemen? The
Government of Haryana have clarified in their letter dated November 2], 1980
bearings No,12/37/79/GSII that the Government have taken a policy decision on
July 1, 1980 and given instructions to recruit the children, i.e. dependent
sons or daughters of ex-servicemen who fulfill all the conditions of
qualifications, age and other criteria prescribed for the post; they may be
considered on merits for the posts reserved for the ex-servicemen to the
unfilled posts. It was confined initially only to dependent children When
clarification was sought for, various criteria have been suggested to identify
the defendants. The Government have examined the matter and found that only an
unemployed person who is a member of the point family and contributes to the
pool of the family income by lending help or a person who has already done has
graduation or is doing post-graduation and getting merit scholarship for the
studies is also eligible to be considered for appointment. In appeals @ SLP (C)
No.21297-99/94, it is specifically averred that the contesting respondents have
not fulfilled the criteria referred to hereinbefore and that, therefore, they
are not eligible to be considered.
Counter-affidavit
has been filed on behalf of the respondent-Selection Board contending that the Sainik
Board had issued a certificate stating that they are the dependants of the
ex-servicemen. On that basis, they had become eligible for consideration. The
Board had accepted the same. It did not have any source for independent
verification and, therefore, they have accepted them as dependants. We are of
the view that the Board is not justified in law to take such a stand. The Board
being the recruiting agency, it is its duty to verify and find out whether a
candidate who has laid his claim as a dependant son or daughter of the deceased
ex-servicemen, fulfilled the criteria referred to earlier for recruitment to
the vacancies reserved for unfilled posts of ex-servicemen. On being satisfied,
the other consideration has to be looked into and selection process could be
made and candidates are selected according to prescribed procedure. It being
the primary duty of the Selection Board, it cannot abdicate its function by
merely relying on certificate issued by the Sainik Board which is only a
recommending authority certifying that the candidate as a dependent of the ex-
servicemen It may be accepted only a Prima facie evidence.
The
certificate does not ipso facto became conclusive nor would it entitle the
candidate to be considered as a dependant of the ex-servicemen. It would be for
the Board to examine and in case of any doubt, it should call upon the
candidate to satisfy the Board that the candidate is dependant and fulfills the
requirements prescribed in the guidelines. That was not done in these cases.
Under
these circumstances, the appeals are allowed.
There
shall be a direction to the first respondent to call upon the candidates to
satisfy the requirements referred to hereinbefore and then- process their
applications according to law and consider their cases against the unfilled
posts reserved for the ex-servicemen within a period of six weeks from the date
of the receipt of this order. No costs.
Back
Pages: 1 2