Manipur High Court
Unknown vs The Union Of India Represented By The … on 20 January, 2025
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Non-reportable
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023
With
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023
1. Khangjrakpam Netrajit Singh aged about 21 years, S/o
Khangjrakpam Ibomcha Singh, a resident of Lamsang Mayai
Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Lamsang, Imphal West District, Manipur-
795146.
2. Ningthoujam Somorjit Singh aged about 22 years, S/o Ningthoujam
Snayaima Singh a resident of Heirok Part-1 Heituppokpi Leikai,
P.O. Wangjing, P.S. Heirok, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
3. Chandam Oshananda Singh aged about 21 years, S/o Chandam
Tompok, a resident of Balaram Khul Maning Leikai, P.O. & P.S.
Nambol, Bishnupur District, Manipur-795134.
4. Thokchom Herojit Singh aged about 22 years, S/o Th. Liklaicha
Singh, a resident of Salungpham Mayai Leikai, Kangthokchao, P.O.
Wangjing, P.S. Heirok, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
5. Shambanduram Stalin Singh aged about 22 years, S/o
Shambanduram Manglen Singh, a resident of Nongpok
Lourembam Makha Leikai, P.O. Yairipok, P.S. Nongpok Sekmai,
Thoubal District, Manipur-795149.
6. Maibam Sanathoi Meitei aged about 22 years, S/o Maibam
Ahongjao Meitei, a resident of Waheng Khuman Maning Leikai,
P.O. Nambol, P.S. wangoi, Bishnupur District, Manipur-795149.
7. Phairembam Basanta Singh aged about 23 years, S/o Phairembam
Kumar Singh, a resident of Moirang College Gate, P.O. & P.S.
Moirang, Bishnupur District, Manipur-795133.
8. Nongmai Tomba aged about 22 years, S/o Nongmaithem Shyam,
a resident of Nachou Kha Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Bishnupur, Bishnupur
District, Manipur-795126.
9. Sandeep Thapa aged about 21 years, S/o Rambahadur Thapa, a
resident of H./No. 039, NH-39, P.O. Kalapahar, P.S. Kangpokpi,
Senapati District-795122.
10. Laikhuram Tondon Singh aged about 22 years, S/o Laikhuram
Raghumani Singh, a resident of Wangjing Wangkhei, P.O.
Wangjing, P.S. Thoubal, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 1
11. Laishram Vandam Singh aged about 23 years, S/o Laishram
Kumar Singh, a resident of Heirok Part-III, Mayai Leikai, P.O.
Wangjing, P.S. Heirok, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
12. Soibam Ronaldo Singh, aged about 22 years, S/o Soibam
Sharatbabu Singh, a resident of Wangjing Awang Leikai, P.O.
Wangjing, P.S. Thoubal, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
13. Kongbrailatpam Sumanta Sharma aged about 21 years, S/o
Kongbrailatpam Gopen Sharma, a resident of Heirok Part-3,
Lamlong Mariphangba, P.O. Wangjing, P.S. Heirok, Thoubal
District, Manipur-795148.
14. Koingbrailatpam Dina Sharma, aged about 19 years, S/o
Kongbrailatpam Gopen Sharma, a resident of Heirok Part-III,
Lamlong Mariphangba, P.O. Wangjing, P.S. Heirok, Thoubal
District, Manipur-795148.
15. Laishram Sunday Singh, aged about 19 years, S/o Laishram
Manubhadra Singh of Heirok Part-II Ningthoujam Leikai, P.O.
Wangjing, P.S. Heirok, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
16. Ningombam Jim Meitei aged about 22 years, S/o Ningombam
Prabhachandra Meitei, a resident of Wangoo Tera Awang Leikai,
P.O. Kakching, P.S. Wangoo, Thoubal District, Manipur-795103.
17. Hijam Modhuchandra Singh aged about 21 years, S/o H. Suro
Singh, a resident of Andro Leitanpekpham Leikai, P.O. Yairipok,
P.S. Andro, Imphal East District, Manipur-795149.
18. Sanasam Binod Singh aged about 22 years, S/o. Sanasam
Kunjeshwor Singh, a resident of Wangoo Tera Mayai Leikai, P.O.
Kakching, P.S. Wangoo, Thoubal District, Manipur-795103.
19. Yumkhaibam Premjit Singh aged about 22 years, S/o Y. Naba
Singh, a resident of Andro Maringthel Leikai, P.O. Yairipok, P.S.
Andro, Imphal East District, Manipur-795149.
20. Ningthoujam Premjit singh aged about 23 years, S/o Ningthoujam
Rajen Singh, a resident of Thambalkhong Mayai Leikai, P.O. & P.S.
Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur-795008.
21. Aheibam Dinash Singh, aged about 21 years, S/o Aheibam Tombi,
a resident of Wanjing Heituppokpi, P.O. & P.S. Wangjing, Thoubal
District, Manipur-795148.
22. Khundongbam Premchand Meitei, aged about 21 years, S/o Kh.
Himaloy Meitei, a resident of Awang Potshangbam, Khullen Makha
Leikai, Potshangbam Khoiru, Imphal West, Manipur.
23. Karam Sanatomba Singh aged about 23 years, S/o Karam Biren
Singh, a resident of Bishnupur Awang Leikai, Part No. 2, P.O. &
P.S. Bishnupur, Bishnupur District, Manipur-795126.
24. Hamom Inganba aged about 22 years, S/o H. Inaobi, a resident of
Bishnupur Mamang Leikai Ward No. 11, P.O. & P.S. Bishnupur,
Bishnupur District, Manipur-795126.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 2
25. Takhellambam Robinson Singh aged about 21 years, S/o
Takhellambam Lukhoi Singh, a resident of Arapti Mamang Leikai,
P.O. Lilong, P.S. Irilbung, Imphal East District, Manipur-795130.
26. Md. Indash Khan, aged about 22 years, S/o Md. Nasir Khan, a
resident of Sangaiyumpham Part-I, Sabal Leikai, P.O. Wangjing,
P.S. Thoubal, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
27. Md. Sameer Ahamad aged about 22 years, S/o (L) Md.
Nasimuddin, a resident of Sangaiyumpham Part-I Puleipokpi, P.O.
Wangjing, P.S. Thoubal, Thoubal District, Manipur-795148.
28. Thokchom Nilakanta Singh, aged about 19 years, S/o Thokchom
Shyamjit Singh of Heirok Part-I Heituppokpi Leikai, P.O. Wangjing,
P.S. Heirok, Imphal West, Manipur-795148.
29. Khumanthem Dainickumar Singh, aged about 20 years, S/o
Khumanthem Bhupendra Singh, a resident of Lamding
Khumanthem Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Wangjing, Thoubal District,
Manipur-795148.
...... Petitioners
- Versus -
1. The Union of India represented by the Secretary, Ministry of
Defence, Government of India, South Block, Central Secretariat, New
Delhi, Delhi (NCT), 110001 ([email protected]);
2. The Secretary, Ministry of Personnel & Public Grievances and
Pension, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi-110001
([email protected]);
3. The Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, South
Block, New Delhi-110001 (Email-defsecy[at]nic.in);
4. The Director Recruiting, Army Recruitment Office, Rangapahar,
Dimapur, Nagaland-785001 ([email protected] &
[email protected])
5. Sagolsem Abotomba Meitei (Chest No. 1372 & roll Nos.
SHI/RP/AGD/150123/140251), aged about 23 years, S/o Sagolsem
Udop Meitei, a resident of Mayang Imphal Maibam, Thoubal District,
Manipur.
6. S.L. Henginlen (Chest No. 1760 & roll Nos.
SHI/RP/AGD/150123/140453), aged about 21 years, S/o SL Vumsei,
a resident of Leimakhong, Kangpokpi District, Manipur and;
7. Pukhrambam Gyanda Singh (Chest No. 1240 & roll Nos.
SHI/RP/AGD/150123/140134), aged about 23 years, S/o Pukhrabam
Ghandi, a resident of Thamnapokpi, Bishnupur District, Manipur.
........Respondent/s
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 3
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
For the Petitioners :: Mr. A. Romenkumar, Sr. Advocate &
Mr. Ng. Jotindra, Advocate
For the respondents :: Mr. Kh. Samarjit, DSGI & Ms. Captain
Shireen Shukla, OIC, Legal Cell, Manipur
High Court.
Date of Hearing :: 02.04.2024/16.12.2024
Date of Order :: 20.01.2025
JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)
[1] Heard Mr. A. Romenkumar, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.
Ng. Jotindra, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. Kh. Samarjit, learned
DSGI for the Union of India along with Ms. Captain Shireen Shukla, OIC, Legal Cell,
Manipur High Court.
[2] The brief facts of the case is that the Director Recruitment, Army
Recruiting Officer, Rangapahar, Dimapur issued a notification dated 04.07.2022 for
conducting a Army Recruitment Rally (For Men) under Agnipath Scheme from
23.11.2022 to 05.12.2022 for all District of Manipur at Leimakhong, Manipur for the
post of Agniveer (General Duty), Angiveer (Technical), Agniveer (Clerk/Store
Keeper Technical), Agniveer (Tradesmen) in Army as per the rules and regulation
of Indian Army/Government of India. The online registration for the said recruitment
started from 05.07.2022 and closed on 03.08.2022.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 4 [3] The petitioners passed the certificate "C" Examination held under the
authority of the Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India. The NCC “C” certificates were
issued by the Addl. Director General, NCC, Shillong in favour of the petitioners and
as such, they fulfilled all the essential as well as desirable qualification prescribed
for Recruitment to the post of Agniveer (General Duty) in Indian Army under the
Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India. The petitioners applied for the said post of
Agniveer (General Duty) for the said recruitment through online as per the
prescribed format given in the notification dated 04.07.2022. Thereafter, all the
petitioners were allowed to attend the physical Fitness test held during 23.11.2022
to 05.12.2022 as per their respective schedule allocated by the Recruitment
authorities and as per the criteria of the recruitment notification, the petitioner Nos.
1 to 5 got excellent in 1.6 Km run and qualified as Group-I having completed 10 pull
ups and also qualified 9 feet Ditch (Jump) and Zig-Zag balance. Similarly, the
petitioners Nos. 6 to 22, 23 to 26 and 27 to 29 were also qualified as Group – II
having completed 10 pull ups, 9 pull ups and 8 pull ups respectively and they also
qualified 9 feet Ditch (Jump) and the Zig-Zag balance.
[4] On completion and having qualified for physical fitness Test, all the
petitioners were allowed for Medical Test on the next following day of their
respective physical test as allocated by the Recruitment authorities. Having being
qualified for the said Medical Test, the petitioners were issued with their respective
admit cards for Common Entrance Examination (CEE) which held on 15.01.2023
at Rangapahar Military Station, Dimapur, Nagaland. On 15.01.2023 while reaching
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 5
at Rangapahar Military Station, Dimapur, Nagaland, for the CEE, the petitioners
were informed not to appear for the examination being NCC “C” Certificate holders
since all the NCC “C” Certificate holders were exempted from appearing the CEE.
Thereafter, on declaration of the result of the said recruitment by uploading in official
website of the Indian Army on 27.01.2023, the present petitioners were not selected
whereas some other NCC “C” Certificate holders who participated in the same
recruitment were selected in the same post of Agniveer (General) Duty) and they
were called for reporting to ARO Rangapahar for preliminary documentation for
dispatch to Regimental Centres as per the district wise schedule given in the said
result.
[5] It is submitted that the act of the respondents selecting some
candidates of NCC “C” Certificate holders without considering the case of the
petitioners are arbitrary, malafide and quite discriminative. In fact, the respondents
acted in pick and choose manner by selecting some NCC “C” Certificate holders
who are similarly situated with the present petitioners because the score obtained
by all the candidates appeared in the said Recruitment test were not disclosed.
Hence, the result of the Agniveer (General Duty ) vide Annexure A/5 is liable to be
quashed.
[6] Thereafter, being aggrieved by the said result, the petitioners filed
several RTI through online and offline seeking information:
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 6
(i) to provide the criteria/mythology on which the selection of the
Army recruitment (for Men) under Agnipath scheme held on
23.11.2022 to 05.12.2022 for all districts of Manipur was based.
(ii) to provide the scoring mark for exemption of NCC “C” Certificate
holders from appearing CEE.
(iii) to provide the reasons for not giving options to appear at the
CEE to NCC C certificate holders in case of failure to allot the
maximum mark for the said CEE to them.
(iv) to provide the particulars of selected candidates in respect of
the State of Manipur alongwith their respective score obtained
in the said recruitment process under Agnipath scheme.
(v) to provide the score obtained by the applicant in this regard.
[7] The respondents authority did not provide the information sought
through RTI as yet. Hence, the particular and details of the selected candidates
could not be trace out as yet.
[8] In the said recruitment notification dated 04.07.2022, it is clearly
mentioned that the candidates who have passed NCC “C” certificate holders are
exempted from Written/CEE. In fact, the petitioners have passed their Physical
fitness Test & Medical Test and they were also exempted for Written Test/CEE
being a NCC “C” Certificate holders. Hence, they are also eligible to be
recommended/selected to the post of Agniveer (General Duty) in the Indian Army
as was one in case of similarly situated persons who are NCC “C” Certificate
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 7
holders who appeared alongwith the petitioners in the same capacity. It is submitted
that the petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 got excellent in Physical and scored outstanding mark
in the aforesaid recruitment and the other petitioners have also qualified their
physical and Medical Test. However, they were not declared successful in the said
recruitment. Such act of the respondents is clearly a pick and choose selection
which is arbitrary, malafide and discriminative because the authority did not provide
the mark scored by all the candidates appeared in the said recruitment and despite
RTI application. Meanwhile, a latest recruitment circular was uploaded by the Army
Recruiting Office, Rangapahar on its official Website inviting from domiciles of all
districts of Manipur for selection test for Agniveer intake for recruiting year 2023-
2024 under Agnipath Scheme.
[9] It is submitted that most of the petitioners have become overage so
that they will not get further opportunity to apply in any army recruitment called for
by virtue of the prescribed age. In fact, this is the last opportunity for them to serve
for the betterment of the Nation if they get selection/appointment to their applied
post of Agniveer (General Duty).
[10] Being aggrieved, the petitioners submitted a joint representation dated
13.02.2023 to the concerned authorities requesting to consider the case of the
petitioners’ selection/appointment to the post of Agniveer (General Duty) in Indian
Army under the Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India as was done in case of other
similarly situated selected person particularly NCC “C” Certificate holders in respect
of the State of Manipur.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 8
[11] The prayer in the writ petition is reproduced below:
(i) to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, or any other appropriate
writ, orders or quashing the impugned result of the selected
candidates (Annexure – A/5) as malafide, arbitrary and
constitutional;
(ii) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other
appropriate writs, orders or directing the respondents to
consider the case of the petitioners for selection/appointment to
the post of Agniveer (General Duty) in Indian Army under the
Ministry of Defence, Govt of India as was done in case of the
simmilarly situated persons particularly NCC “C” Certificate
holders in respect of the Writ petition;
(iii) to pass an interim order directing the respondents to reserve 29
posts of Agniveer (General Duty) against the recruitment
process vide Annexure – A/7 during the pendency of the writ
petition;
(iv) to pass an interim order directing the respondents to consider
and dispose of the said representations dated 13.02.2023
(Annexure – A/8) during the pendency of the writ petition;
(v) to direct the respondents for heavy costs and
(vi) to pass any further order or orders as to the Hon'ble Court may
seem fit and proper for the ends of justice and equity.”
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 9 [11] Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed affidavit-in-opposition wherein it is stated
that the basic educational qualification for the selection of Agniveer (GD) is class
10 and their are no bonus marks for additional education qualification. The selection
of respondent No. 5 to 7 has been done on software by master parameters fed as
per para 11 of Policy letter No. 62587/Rtg 5 (OR) (A) dated 31.07.2001.
Respondent No. 6 has been selected against the vacancy of a fixed class which is
different than the petitioners. It is also stated that the recruitment notification dated
04.07.2022 on Joint Indian Army website includes all the information and basic
criteria that are needed for registration and screening for the post of Agniveer (GD)
and the notification is not the governing policy for selection of candidates. It is
further stated that the recruitment in the Indian Army is based on domicile cum merit
and there is no embargo/bar on any individual of any caste/creed/religion/race to
be recruited in the Army, provided the individual meets the requirement of written,
physical & medical parameters as well as qualifications laid down. The distribution
of the Arms & Services to successful candidates are carried out by the software
based on the particulars declared by the candidates, fed in the system post
verification of same and subsequently on pure merit. The results have been
published on Join Indian Army website and selected candidates have been
despatched to training centres and the existing recruiting system provided equal
opportunity to all citizens of India to join the Indian Army irrespective of their caste.
It is stated that the selection of respondent Nos. 5 to 7 as well as those incumbents
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 10
mentioned in para 6 are purely based on merit and as per laid down policy of
recruiting Directorate, IHQ of MoD (Army).
[12] Vide order dated 22.02.2023, this Court transferred the case to Delhi
High Court to be dealt with pending cases on Agniveer Scheme in terms of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 19.07.2022 in WP(C) No. 457 of 2022 and this
case was registered as WP(C) No. 3175 of 2023. However, vide order dated
20.03.2023 in WP(C) No. 3175 of 2023, Delhi High Court clarified that the matters
before it were confined to challenging the validity of Agniveer Scheme and the
cases relating to challenge in selection process are to be dealt by the respective
High Courts. Accordingly, the petitioners moved an application being MC[WP(C)]
No. 145 of 2023 to recall the order dated 22.02.2023 passed by this Court
transferring the case to Delhi High Court and vide order dated 19.05.2023, this
Court recalled its earlier order dated 22.02.2023. Thereafter, vide order dated
02.06.2023 in WP(C) No. 3175 of 2023, Delhi High Court remanded the matter to
this Court and the case is taken up for hearing. Vide order dated 03.07.2023 and in
terms of the contents of para 12 the rejoinder affidavit of the petitioners, this Court
recorded that the petitioners dropped relief no. (i) and would pursue only the relief
nos. (ii) to (vi) for their appointment as Agniveer (GD) as done in the case of private
respondent nos. 5 to 7. In the circumstances, the petitioners confined their relief for
selection as Agniveer(GD) and no longer challenge the whole selection process of
Agniveer in terms of Advertisement dated 04.07.2022.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 11 [13] It is the case of the petitioners that they have been denied selection
as Agniveer(GD) on the basis of some vague conditions not mentioned in the
Advertisement dated 04.07.2022. It is urged that petitioner nos. 1 to 5 & 20 scored
the maximum marks of 200 and no reason is given for not selecting them. It is the
case of official respondents that the selection process is assessed by software and
accordingly, the private respondents were selected and the petitioners could not be
selected due to non-availability of vacancy (only 2 vacant posts available) and the
petitioners are kept in reserved list. Petitioner No.9 is not medically fit.
[14] On the basis of the pleadings of the parties and materials on record,
this Court frames the point of determination as:
“Whether the petitioner can be denied selection as Agniveer (GD) on
the basis of conditions not mentioned in the Advertisement and non-
availability of vacant posts, when the number of vacancies has not
been mentioned in the advertisement?”
[15] Mr. A. Romenkumar, learned senior counsel for the petitioners
submits that the Advertisement dated 04.07.2022 provides the whole scheme of
selection of Agniveer of five categories and the petitioners have applied for
Agniveer (General Duty) (All Arms), in short, Agniveer (GD). Para 15 prescribes the
procedures for selection in order: (i) Physical Fitness Test (at Rally site), (ii) Physical
Measurement (at Rally site), (iii) Medical Test (at Rally site), and (iv) Written Test
through Common Entrance Examination (CEE). Admit card for CEE will be issued
to medically fit candidates. As per para 16(l), the candidates having NCC ‘C’
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 12
certificates are exempted from appearing in CEE, thereby meaning that they will
get full 100 marks for CEE and all the petitioners are having ‘C’ certificates entitling
to 100 marks automatically. Learned senior counsel draws the attention of this
Court to admit cards annexed at Annexure A-4(Colly) where it is mentioned that
admit card to be issued on successful completion of medical examination. In other
words, the candidates who got admit cards are medically fit and it is submitted that
petitioner no.9 is medically unfit cannot be sustained. Learned senior counsel refers
to Annexure X-2 of the counter affidavit filed by the official respondents giving
details of marks obtained by the petitioners where petitioner nos. 1 to 5 & 20 got full
marks of 200 and the remaining petitioners scored marks ranging from 188 to 169.
It is pointed out that no reason is disclosed by the official respondents for denying
selection of petitioner nos. 1 to 5 & 20. The score of the last selected candidate is
also not disclosed. It is alleged that candidates scoring less marks than the
petitioners (least mark 169) have been selected and pick and choose method has
been employed.
[16] Mr. A. Romenkumar, learned senior counsel refers to the following
case laws to buttress his argument.
(i) Bihar State Text Book Workers Union v. State of Bihar: (2013) 7
SCC 238 @ Para 5 holding that qualification not prescribed in the
advertisement or any statutory rules cannot be introduced.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 13
(ii) Food Corporation of India v. RIMJHIM: 2019 (6) Scale 129 holding
that one year experience not mentioned in the advertisement cannot be
used to deny appointment.
(iii) Sachin Kumar v. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board:
(2021) 4 SCC 631 which postulates that fair and reasonable selection
process is fundamental right under Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of
India.
(iv) Santosh Kumar v. G R Chawla: (2003) 10 SCC 513 bars introduction
of pick and choose method in appointment.
(v) Sivanandan CT v. High Court of Kerala: (2024) 3 SCC 799 [5J]
postulates that when the original advertisement for selection of District
Judge from Bar in Kerala, the select list will be made on the basis of marks
obtained in written test and viva voce and no cut off mark was prescribed
for viva voce, the introduction of minimum cutoff mark in viva voce after the
conduct of interview was held to be ultra vires.
[17] Relying on the above cited case laws in the factual matrix of the
present case, Mr. A. Romenkumar, learned senior counsel submits that the
petitioners are also entitled to be selected as Agniveer(GD) as done in the case of
the respondents nos. 5 to 7 and official respondents cannot invoke conditions not
mentioned in the advertisement for rejecting the legitimate claims of the petitioners.
It is further stated that the method adopted by the official respondents lacks
transparency and consistency and the same amounts to pick and choose method.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 14
It is prayed that a direction be issued to the official respondents to appoint the
petitioners as Agniveer (GD) and if vacant posts are not available, further direction
may be issued to create adequate posts to adjust the petitioners.
[18] Per contra, Mr. Kh. Samarjit, learned DSGI on behalf of the Union of
India submits that possessing NCC ‘C’ certificates does not automatically guarantee
selection in the Agniveer Scheme and the same exempts such candidates from
appearing in the CEE thereby assuring 100 marks. It is pointed out that the
petitioners holder of NCC ‘C’ certificates were exempted from appearing in the CEE
and they were credited with full 100 marks of CEE. Referring to the selection
process as defined in the counter affidavit and additional affidavit (depicting in
Chart- 1, 2 & 3) that the marks and other evaluation are fed into a software
developed for the selection purpose (since 2009 used by Army) and considering
the availability of only 2 seats, the private respondents were picked up for selection
after assessment of all relevant data. It is explained that the selection process does
not involve any human intervention thereby ruling out any manipulation. The
petitioners, except petitioner no.9 who is found to be medically unfit, are kept as
reserves. It is also pointed out that in the Advertisement, a stipulation is made at
para 41 that the terms and conditions given in the notification are subject to change
and should be treated as guidelines and in case of any ambiguity, the existing
policies, rules and regulations of Indian Army/ Government of India will be final and
details thereof are available on website www.joinindianarmy.nic.in. It is highlighted
that in case of tie of total marks, the selection has to be done in terms of existing
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 15
rules and orders as available in website. It is submitted that such an endeavour
does not amount to introduction of new conditions not notified, since the existing
rules and orders are applicable in terms of para 41 of the Advertisement. The plea
of adjustment of the petitioners in the next advertisement for the year 2023-2024
cannot be made as the petitioners are not candidates for the next recruitment of
Agniveer. It is prayed that the writ petition be dismissed being devoid of any merit.
[19] This Court considers the materials on record, the submissions made
at bar and the relevant law in this regard.
[20] It will be fruitful to peruse the Advertisement dated 04.07.2022 for
recruitment of Agniveers including Agniveer(GD) for which the petitioners have
applied for the recruitment year 2022-2023. Para 2(a) provides that the enrolment
of Agniveer will be for a period of 4 years with scope for absorption as regular cadre.
Para 11 prescribes minimum educational qualification of Class X with 45% in
aggregate and 33% in each subject or equivalent of C2 with 17½ -23 years for
Agniveer (General Duty) (All Arms). Para 12 prescribes physical standards and
Para 15 stipulates Physical Fitness Test with marks allotted, Medical Test and
Written Test through Common Entrance Test (CEE). It is mentioned that only those
who passed medical fitness test will be given admit card for appearing in CEE. Para
17(e) & (f) exempt candidates with NCC ‘C’ certificate holders and also ‘C’ holder
with participation in Republic Day Parade are exempted from appearing in CEE.
Total marks in physical test is 100 and in CEE is 100. Hence, NCC ‘C’ certificate
holders are entitled to 100 marks in CEE. The advertisement is silent on the point
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 16
of selection in case of tie in the total scores out of maximum 200 marks. These are
the conditions laid down in the advertisement for selection of Agniveers.
[21] Admittedly, all the petitioners (29 in numbers) are NCC ‘C’ certificates
holders with minimum education qualification as prescribed and some of them are
also graduates. In terms of Para 17 of the advertisement, they are exempted from
appearing in CEE and are credited 100 marks. After successfully passing the
medical test, all the petitioners have been issued with admit cards at Annexure A-
4(colly) for appearing in CEE as stipulated under Para 15. It is mentioned in the
admit card that the same is to be issued to the candidate who has successfully
completed the medical examination. In other words, all the petitioners are medically
fit. The stand of the official respondents that petitioner no.9 is found to be medically
unfit cannot be accepted, as admit card has been issued to him after successful
participation in medical test. The plea of the respondents to the effect that
respondent nos. 5 & 7 were picked up by the software on assessment of all relevant
data cannot also be accepted as the petitioner nos. 1 to 5 & 20 were not considered
by the software even though they got maximum mark of 200. No material has been
disclosed by the official respondents for denying appointment to such petitioners
scoring 200 marks and preferring the private respondents over them. It has also not
been stated by the official respondents that other petitioners scored less marks than
the last selected candidates. When the advertisement does not indicate the number
of posts available for selection, denying appointment to person scoring maximum
marks on the plea of non-availability of posts is unfair, inconsistent and the same
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 17
amounts to pick and choose method by the software and by the official respondents.
The procedure adopted by the official respondents in denying the appointment to
the petitioners with maximum marks is devoid of any logic and any subsequent
conditions allegedly attempted to justify such practice is hit by the above cited case
laws specially the Constitution Bench decision in the case of Sivanandan CT
(supra).
[22] In the circumstances, this Court directs the official respondents to
appoint the petitioner nos. 1 to 5 & 20 as Agniveer(GD) forthwith, as they scored
maximum 200 marks and their appointment cannot be denied on the basis of
conditions not mentioned in the advertisement and non existence of vacant posts.
For the remaining petitioners, if candidates with lesser marks have been appointed,
they also be appointed as Agniveer (GD). Adequate posts have to be created to
adjust petitioners nos. 1 to 5 & 20 and such other petitioners found eligible as
directed herein above. The whole process for examination of the case of the
petitioners nos. 6 to 19 & 21 to 29 has to be completed within a period of 2 months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the above
directions will be confined to the petitioners alone and will not be extended to those
who have not approached this Court. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Pending applications stand disposed of.
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 18
[23] Send a copy of this order to the respondent No.4 for information
and necessary compliance.
JUDGE
FR/NFR
joshua
RAJKUMA Digitally signed
by RAJKUMAR
R PRIYOJIT PRIYOJIT SINGH
Date: 2025.01.20
SINGH 16:42:03 +05'30'
MC(WP(C) No. 180 of 2023 with
WP(C) No. 167 of 2023 Page 19
[ad_1]
Source link