Printed Validity On Caste Certificate Is Insignificant If It Certifies Holder's OBC Status For Specific Financial Year: HP High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that the printed validity of a period at the top of an OBC certificate becomes irrelevant if the certificate clearly certifies the applicant's OBC status for a specific financial year.Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua said: “It is the fact certified in the certificate that is material. If that certification is about status as OBC for a specific period and if...
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that the printed validity of a period at the top of an OBC certificate becomes irrelevant if the certificate clearly certifies the applicant's OBC status for a specific financial year.
Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua said: “It is the fact certified in the certificate that is material. If that certification is about status as OBC for a specific period and if the certification regarding the period of OBC status differs from a cyclostyled period, casually mentioned at the top of the certificate, the actual certificate with respect to period of OBC status will take precedence”.
The petitioner, Rasham applied for the post of Laboratory Technician. 36 posts were advertised, out of which 5 were reserved for OBC candidates of Himachal Pradesh. For claiming OBC reservation, applicants were required to furnish a valid OBC certificate valid “till the relevant term of the financial year.”
The petitioner submitted the certificate, covering the entire period in accordance with the advertisement. Relying on the printed remarked at the top of the certificate “for one year from the date of issue”, the authorities rejected the petitioner's candidature and stated that the OBC certificate was not valid for the entire financial period required for the post.
The Court stated that in Shri Nashik Panchavati Panjarpol Trust & Ors. V/s The Chairman & Anr., 2023 the Supreme Court held that it cannot be gainsaid that as per the rules of doctrine of harmonius construction, the document has to be read as a whole and in its totality.
Thus, the Court quashed the rejection of the petitioner's candidature and directed the authorities to appoint him. It held that the authorities had misread the OBC certificate and wrongly denied him appointment by relying on the printed information casually mentioned at the top of the certificate instead of the certified financial year mentioned in the certificate.
Case Name: Rasham Raj V/s State of H.P. & Ors.
Case No.: CWP No.4840 of 2025
Date of Decision: 17.07.2025
For the Petitioner: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Additional Advocate General for respondents No.1 and 2
Mr.Sandeep K. Pandey, Advocate for respondent No.3
Respondent No.4, ex-parte