Final Year Candidates Awaiting Results Are Permitted To Apply In Indian Coast Guard For Appointment To Post Of Asst. Commandant: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court allowed a plea challenging the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner by the Indian Coast Guard (respondent) for appointment to the post of Assistant Commandant (General Duty) on the ground that at the time of filling up the application form, the petitioner was in the fifth semester and not in the sixth or final semester, hence, he did not meet the minimum educational qualification as prescribed in Para 4 (a) of the advertisement concerned.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna stated that there was no dispute to the position that at the time of filling up the online form, the petitioner was in his sixth semester/ final year and his results for the fifth semester were awaited.

“Also, the petitioner had got his original Provisional Degree Certificate on 22.07.2022 i.e., before stage-III Final Selection Board on 02.10.2022. The stand of respondents was that the document verification for the first time was done at stage II and the petitioner was declared qualified erroneously. Meaning thereby, had the factum of petitioner’s not meeting eligibility come to notice of respondents, the petitioner would have been able to show there and then by producing his graduate degree”, added the Bench.

Therefore, while observing that the advertisement in question also notifies that the successful candidates should be able to submit provisional/original degree at the time of Final Section Board i.e. Stage-III, the Bench stated that it was not the case of either side that at the time of Final Section Board i.e. Stage-III, petitioner was asked to produce his degree, which he was unable to produce.

“This Court has not commented upon the other eligibility criteria than the one relating to the production of educational degree. Subject to fulfilment of other eligibility criteria notified in an advertisement of the 01/2023 batch by the petitioner, the respondents shall issue an offer of appointment for the post of Assistant Commandant (GD) to him within two weeks of this judgment to enable the petitioner to join with batch 2/2023”, clarified the Bench.

Advocate Virendra Goswami appeared for the Petitioner, whereas Senior Advocate Pavan Narang appeared for the Respondent.

In this case, the petitioner was a final year/sixth-semester student of graduation course, according to an Advertisement dated Feb 2022 inviting applications for the post of Assistant Commandant (General Duty) in Indian Coast Guard, applied for the same under the unreserved category. It was the case of the petitioner that in terms of clause 4(a) of the advertisement, he was duly qualified and fulfilled the requisite conditions for the appointment. However, since the advertisement regarding final year/sixth-semester students was not clear, the petitioner sought clarification in this regard. In reply thereto, the respondents asked the petitioner to refer to the subject advertisement. The Petitioner claimed to have appeared in the Final Medical Board Examination. However, he was informed having been declared ‘unfit’ due to being ‘overweight’. Being dissatisfied, the petitioner issued a legal notice to the Director General, Union of India through the Defence Secretary, however, the same was not replied to.

After considering the submission, the High Court found that as per the advertisement for the 01/23 batch, candidates who were either in the final year or final semester and awaiting results were permitted to apply.

The High Court stated that it was not the case that the petitioner had not been able to qualify for different stages of examination for the post in question, since the petitioner’s strong determination to join the Force was established from the fact that he lost 15 kg in 42 days with utmost dedication to qualify the Stage-IV i.e. Medical by the respondents and he was declared successful.

The High Court applied the dictum of Charles K. Skaria v Dr C. Mathew and Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, Jee to the facts of the present case and found that appointments for batch 01/2023 had already been done and all seats had already been filled, however, the interest of justice would be met if one seat for the petitioner was created with the batch 01/2023.

The High Court directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for an appointment with the 02/2023 batch, but having the seniority and consequential benefits of the 01/2023 batch and in case no vacancy was available, respondents were directed to create one seat for petitioner with 01/2023 batch.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.

Cause Title: Vinayak Sharma v. Indian Coast Guard and Ors. [Neutral Citation: 2023: DHC: 4346-DB]

Click here to read/download the Judgment