The above ruling got here in a writ petition filed by a candidate aspiring to turn out to be a Civil Judge (Junior Division) within the State. The petitioner primarily a path to the respondents—notably respondent no. 3, i.e., the Chairman of the Jharkhand Public Service Commission—to implement a horizontal quota within the sports activities class for the Civil Judge (Junior Division) examination performed in December 2018.

Additionally, the petitioner additionally prayed for the issuance of writ within the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to take applicable motion regarding his candidature for the aforesaid put up within the aforesaid examination.

The petitioner argued that the reservation advantages ought to solely apply to residents of the State of Jharkhand in instances associated to reservation. They asserted that each the commercial and the Sports Policy lack specific provisions stating that reservation advantages underneath the Sports Quota are unique to native residents of Jharkhand.

Additionally, it was highlighted that the principles of the National School Games specify that these video games are to be organized by affiliated models of the School Games Federation of India. Notably, the 56th National School Games have been organized by the School Games Federation of India, which is acknowledged by the Indian Olympic Association and is thereby related to it.

Alternatively, the respondent contended that the petitioner’s use of the 56th National School Games 2010 certificates to say reservation underneath the Sports Quota was invalid. According to the respondent, this certificates was issued by the Directorate of Public Instructions, Government of Chhattisgarh, underneath the supervision of the School Games Federation of India. Importantly, it was not organized by a federation affiliated with the Indian Olympic Association.

Therefore, the respondent contended that the sports activities certificates offered by the petitioner isn’t eligible for availing the advantages of reservation as per the phrases outlined within the commercial.

The Court positioned reliance on the case of Maharashtra Public Service Commission by way of its Secretary Vs. Sandeep Shriram Warade and others (being lead case), (2019) 6 SCC 362, whereby it was held that the important {qualifications} for appointment to a put up are for the employer to resolve and the employer might prescribe extra or fascinating {qualifications}, together with any grant of desire.

It was additional held that it’s the employer who’s finest suited to resolve the necessities a candidate should possess based on the wants of the employer and the character of labor, and the courtroom can not lay down the situations of eligibility, a lot much less can it delve into the difficulty with regard to fascinating {qualifications} being at par with the important eligibility by an interpretive re-writing of the commercial.

“Thus, it is clear from the aforesaid discussion of facts and law that the petitioner’s case is already covered by the judgment of the coordinate Bench of this Court and therefore, in due regard to the coordinate Bench of this Court, we are not inclined to hold that the petitioner is entitled to the relief he has claimed,” the Court stated whereas dismissing the writ petition.

The above ruling was delivered by a division bench of Chief Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay.

Counsel/s For the Petitioner: Ms. Shivani Kapoor, Advocate

Amicus Curiae: Mr. Kumar Vaibhav, Advocate

Counsel/s For the State: Mr. Harsh Preet Singh, A.C. to G.P.-V For the JPSC: Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate

Counsel/s For the JHC: Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava, Advocate

Counsel/s For the IOA: Ms. Sidhi Jalan, Advocate

LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 141

Case Title: Mayank Singh Thakur @ Mayank Singh vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Case No.: W.P. (T) No. 160 of 2021

Click Here To Read/Download Judgement