Jitendra Singh vs Union Of India And Ors

The petitioner has prayed for the benefit of NCC Grade `C’ certificate and to add bonus marks based thereon to those obtained by him in his written examination and thereafter to declare him entitled to be appointed on the post of Constable in CISF or CRPF.

The facts of the case are that pursuant to an advertisement dated 24-1-2015 inviting applications for the post of Constable (GC) in CRPF, NIA, SSF and Rifleman (GC) in Assam Rifles the petitioner applied on 10-2-2015 filling his choices in the column relating to Order of Preference. Following due process, the petitioner states to have been after passing the physical examination held in July, 2015 then participated in the written examination held in October, 2015, wherein he was declared pass on 15-3-2016, with 77 marks. The petitioner was then medically examined on 3-6-2016 and required to submit requisite documents related to eligibility/ qualification. That the petitioner did. Included with the submission was the certificate of NCC `C’ grade dated 18-4-2013. In the merit list declared on 2-2-2017 the last cut off marks in the category of the petitioner for CISF and CRPF was 80 and 79, respectively. The petitioner with 77 marks was thus not declared successful.

The petitioner’s case is that if the NCC Grade `C’ certificate submitted by him would have been considered and bonus marks therefor granted, as ought to have been, granted, he would have secured the minimum cut off marks and been selected. Wrongly denied bonus/ additional marks for the NCC Grade `C’ certificate, as the petitioner claims, this petition has been filed.

Mr. S.C. Kashyap, Under Secretary, in the office of Regional Director (NR) Staff Selection Commission has filed a counter affidavit in opposition to the petition. He has stated on oath that there was no provision in the advertisement dated 24- 1-2015 nor is there any in the relevant recruitment rules to provide weightage for the NCC Grade `C’ certificate and allow bonus marks to buttress the marks in the written examination.

Nor such benefit has been given to any other candidate.

Counsel for the petitioner reiterating the facts mentioned in the writ petition prayed for direction to respondents for providing benefits of NCC Grade `C’ certificate and bonus marks therefor—with its attendant consequence of the petitioner’s selection as Constable in CISF/ CRPF as may be with reference to cut off marks determined therefor.

Mr. Ashish Kumar, counsel for respondents submitted that admittedly there was no condition in the advertisement dated 24-1-2015 for grant of any incentive/ bonus marks for a NCC Grade `C’ certificate. The selection process was conducted in the manner set out and as provided in the advertisement—no deviation in the ascertainment of merit was adopted. That the notified process for selection was contravened is not even the petitioner’s case. He only ill advisedly claims a benefit without legal foundation. Besides the petitioner has filed the petition only after the declaration of the final result—actuated no doubt by an obvious grievance at failure. Such grievance not being founded on law is merely a disappointment for which law visualizes no remedy.

Heard. Considered.

Admittedly the petitioner pursuant to advertisement dated 24-1-2015 after filling online application participated in the selection process without demur at all levels. No quarrel was set up in regard thereto including on the issue of the advertisement not providing any bonus marks for a NCC grade `C’ certificate. Only on declaration of the final result on 2-2-2017, where the petitioner was unsuccessful, he filed the instant petition without any legal foundation claiming benefit of NCC Grade `C’ certificate, even though there was no such provision in the advertisement. The petition is thus without any legal foundation. Even otherwise as held by the Apex Court in the case of Manish Kumar Shahi Vs. State of Bihar [(2010)12 SCC 576] that having participated in the selection process (as the petitioner did) a candidate is not entitled to challenge the criteria or process of selection.

For the reasons mentioned above, there is no merit in the petition, the same is dismissed.