LexMOHIT KUMAR versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 6 S.C.R. 499 : 2025 INSC 704 Mohit Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 5233 of 2025) 15 May 2025 [Dipankar Datta* and Manmohan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Board was bound to accept the OBC certificates submitted by aspirants which, admittedly, were not in the format prescribed in the recruitment notification. Headnotes† Service law – Recruitment – Submission of caste certificate by aspirants in the format prescribed – Requirement, if mandatory – Appellant-candidate applied for the post of sub-inspector and was called for examination – However, his representation rejected on the ground that he did not submit OBC certificate in the prescribed format and thus, considered in the general category – Writ petition by the appellant – Dismissed by the High Court – In other case, the respondent- candidate not placed on select list because certificate was not submitted in the prescribed format – Writ petition thereagainst, allowed by the Single Judge of High Court, directing the Recruitment Board to accept the OBC certificate submitted by the respondent and to process her application further – Division Bench upheld the same – Correctness: Held: Although there is no statutory mandate as regards the requirement of production of a certificate from the competent authority in the facts of the case, requirement in question is no less mandatory and must be scrupulously followed – Once a process of recruitment is set in motion, all aspirants are entitled in law to equal treatment – There cannot be different yardsticks for different sets of aspirant – Non-compliance with the terms of the notification is bound to trigger adverse consequences of rejection of the aspirant’s claimed status – Selecting body/appointing authority would be justified in not entertaining the application of * Author 500 [2025] 6 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports an aspirant as a member of the community for whom reservations are permissible – Terms of an advertisement issued in connection with a selection process are normally not open to challenge unless the challenge is founded on the ground of breach – Recruiting authority is the best judge of what its requirements are and it is such understanding of the recruiting authority that would matter most in cases brought up before the courts – After commencement of the process wherein aspirants have participated without raising any demur as to what a particular terms means, even if any of the terms be ambiguous, the courts should lean in favour of the recruiting authority – Even if the two candidates had doubts as to whether the certificates that they had would suffice, nothing prevented them from seeking such clarification and, at the same time, approach the concerned tehsildars to issue certificates in the requisite format – It cannot be said that insistence on the part of Board of certificates issued in the requisite format is a mere formality which could have been dispensed with since they had certificates issued in the other format – Thus, the candidates not entitled to any relief. [Paras 14, 19, 21, 24] Case Law Cited Registrar General, Calcutta High Court v. Shrinivas Prasad Shah and Ors. [2013] 3 SCR 211 : (2013) 12 SCC 364 – relied on. Bedanga Talukdar v. Saifudaullah Khan [2011] 11 SCR 635 : (2011) 12 SCC 85; State of T.N. v. G. Hemalathaa (2020) 19 SCC 430; Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, Jee & Ors. [2004] Supp. 5 SCR 79 : (2005) 9 SCC 779; Dheerender Singh Paliwal v. Union Public Service Commission (2017) 11 SCC 276; Ram Kumar Gijroya v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selections Board and Anr. (2016) 4 SCC 754; Karn Singh Yadav v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors., (2024) 2 SCC 588; Meeta Sahai v. State of Bihar [2019] 15 SCR 273 : (2019) 20 SCC 17 – referred to. Gaurav Sharma v. State of U.P., 2013 SCC OnLine All 1286 – referred to. List of Acts Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Schedule Castes, Schedule Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994; Uttar Pradesh Sub-inspector and Inspector (Civic Police) Service (Amended) Rules, 2015; Wealth Tax Act, 1957. [2025] 6 S.C.R. 501 Mohit Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. List of Keywords OBC certificate; Certificate in prescribed format; Ahir community; General category candidate; Reservation; Recruiting authority; Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Board; Recruitment notification;
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.