The Delhi High Court on 10.01.2019, in RAHUL KUMAR MEENA v UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. (W.P.(C) 7804/2018 & CM No. 29914/2018) [1], allowed the petition that had been filed  for quashing and setting aside the Directorate General’ , Central Reserve Police Force’s  order wherein the petitioner  candidature belonging  to the Scheduled Tribes (ST)  was  cancelled for appointing him  to the Constable (GD)’s post  in  the CAPFs.

FACTS:

The  Staff Selection Commission  had put up an advertisement for recruiting candidates  to the Constable’s post  the BSF, CRPF, CISF, ITBP, SSB, NIA and SSF and Rifleman in Assam Rifles where few of  seats had  been reserved for the categories belonging to the  ST and SC  along with a  relaxation in terms of standards of the height and minimum requirement  of  height for males.

The petitioner had applied for the concerned post in the ST category ,wherein after clearing the required exam ,he was called for  a medical examination  that was eventually passed by him. Despite, qualifying for  both the exams his name was not mentioned in the merit list  that was declared by the   Staff Selection Commission

 In the meantime, a list of allocation of the Constables had been published by the respondents in which the petitioner  had applied for the region of Delhi while citing his preference order as. Likewise, the name of the petitioner was not figured in allocation list , while  a candidate who had scored less than the petitioner  was selected. The petitioner made a representation to address his grievance before the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes ,where notices were issues to the respondents by the Commission. However, devoid of a positive response from the respondents, a writ petition was filed by the petitioner before the High Court  that  issued notice to the respondents where a letter was produced by the respondents to the Commission that stated that the  petitioner was from a caste that had not been notified   in the ST Category in central list of Delhi being the reason for the inconsideration in the concerned category.

An order was passed by the Court which granted liberty to the petitioner for making a  representation to the respondents in connection to the  eligibility for the concerned  selection. A request for re-examining the case was made to the respondents where an order upon the representation was passed stating the same ground for rejection resulting in the filing of the petition in the High Court to challenge  such order.

DECISION HELD BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT:

The Delhi High Court  while allowing the petition, held that that the petitioner was entitled  to an  equal treatment in the concerned category that had been reserved for the ST’s in the selection  and that the petitioner shall be entitled to the relaxation benefit in terms of physical standard and minimum requirement  of height  while directing the respondents  for appointing the petitioner to the concerned post .