Validity Mentioned At Top Of Caste Certificates Insignificant If It Certifies Caste Status For Specific Financial Year: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court observed that the validity mentioned at the top of the certificates becomes insignificant if the certificate certifies the candidate’s OBC status for a specific financial year.

A Writ Petition was filed by the Petitioner being aggrieved that the State did not consider the OBC certificates produced by him at the time of document verification for appointment to the post of Laboratory Technician on the ground of the same being not in conformity with the advertisement.

The Bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua observed, “Though at the top of OBC certificate dated 29.03.2023, its validity was stated to be one year from the date of issue, however, the aforesaid document certifies the petitioner to be an OBC of Himachal Pradesh for the financial year 2022-2023, i.e. with effect from 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023. This period of financial year 2022-2023 covers the period for which the petitioner was required to be in possession of OBC certificate in terms of the advertisement. Respondents appear to have been swayed away by the validity of the OBC certificates mentioned at the top of the said certificates. The validity mentioned at the top of the certificates becomes insignificant in view of what has been certified in the said certificates, which is otherwise in sync with the notification dated 09.01.2012 and also satisfies the requirement of the advertisement.”

Advocate Yogesh Kumar Chandel represented the Petitioner, while Advocates Y.P.S. Dhaulta and Sandeep K. Pandey for Respondents.

Case Brief

An advertisement was issued inviting online recruitment applications for recruitment to the post of Laboratory Technician to be filled up on contract basis in the National Health Mission. Out of total 36 posts of Laboratory Technicians advertised, 05 were meant for Other Backward Classes (OBC) of Himachal Pradesh.

The Advertisement stated that the candidates must have a valid OBC certificate covering the entire period from last date of submission of online applications till date of document verification/selection alongwith an undertaking that his status as OBC has not been changed and he has not been excluded from the category of OBC of Himachal Pradesh on account of being covered under creamy layer.

The Petitioner appeared for document verification and also produced his OBC certificate, certifying that ‘he is not part of (Creamy Layer) as per the Income Certificate issued for the financial year 2022-2023’. However, no further action was taken by the respondents for quite some time and at the time of issuing appointment letters, the name of the Petitioner was not mentioned.

According to the Respondents, the OBC certificates produced by the Petitioner at the time of document verification, did not cover the entire period from the closing date for submission of online applications till the date of document verification. It was contended that no valid certificate existed for determining Petitioner’s eligibility as an OBC candidate on the crucial date, i.e. 02.10.2022.

Court’s Analysis

The Court found that the Respondents had misconstrued the stipulation in the advertisement and the notification vis-à-vis validity of the OBC certificates produced by the Petitioner.

The Court relied upon a notification issued by the State Revenue Department and observed, “According to the above extracted clause, Bonafide Himachali, Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Ward of freedom fighters, Dogra class, community and legal heir certificates, would be permanent certificates. All other certificates shall remain valid till the relevant term of the financial year. This is also the stipulation in the advertisement regarding validity of OBC certificate of candidates of Himachal Pradesh. As per the advertisement dated 19.09.2022, the said certificates have to be valid till the relevant term of financial year in terms of the notification dated 09.01.2012.”

Therefore, the OBC certificate should have been valid till the relevant term of the financial year.

“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 period of 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 Court said.

Accordingly, the Writ was allowed.

Cause Title: Rasham V. State of H.P. & Ors. (Neutral Citation:2025:HHC:23044 )

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocate Yogesh Kumar Chandel

Respondents: Advocate Y.P.S. Dhaulta for Respondents No. 1 and 2. Advocate Sandeep K. Pandey for Respondent No.3.

Click here to read/download Judgmen