Punjab & Haryana High Court slaps ₹1.5 lakh costs on HPSC for rejecting Dalit woman's candidature

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently granted relief to a woman candidate who was disqualified at the viva voce/interview stage by the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) due to her Scheduled Caste certificate not being issued in the proper format by the competent authority..The Court also imposed costs of ₹1.5 lakh on the HPSC, directing ₹50,000 to be paid to the petitioner and an exemplary cost of ₹1 lakh to be deposited in favour of the Poor Patient’s Welfare Fund PGIMER, Chandigarh within two weeks.The petitioner challenged the rejection of her candidature for the Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Examination 2023-2024 and sought her appointment as Civil Judge (Junior Division) in Haryana.A bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel set aside the order dated September 12, 2024 by which the HPSC had rejected the woman's candidature.Furthermore, the HPSC and the High Court were directed to take immediate consequential steps, including appointing the petitioner..The petitioner had applied as a Scheduled Caste (SC) candidate and submitted her SC certificate dated July 11, 2016 within the stipulated time. She cleared both the preliminary and main written exams and was scheduled for an interview on September 15, 2024.On September 5, 2024, she informed HPSC via email that her SC certificate and domicile certificate had already been submitted, but the registration number and date were missing. She clarified that the certificate was issued based on her father’s SC certificate from July 11, 1991. She also obtained verification from the Tehsildar, Gurugram confirming its authenticity and informed HPSC about it.Despite this, HPSC rejected her candidature through an order dated September 12, 2024. The petitioner then approached the High Court, which passed an interim relief order on September 18, 2024 while considering her petition..Considering that no fault is attributable to the petitioner regarding the format, date and registration number of the requisite SC certificate, the Court observed that the Tehsildar, Gurugram had ratified the veracity of the petitioner’s SC certificate dated July 11, 2016.The Court said that any fault lay with the Tehsildar for issuing the certificate without a registration number and date. The petitioner, having pursued her legal rights diligently and expeditiously, was unfairly subjected to an arbitrary rejection by the HPSC, the Court added..Before concluding, the Court also underscored a broader issue concerning the State's role as a litigant. It emphasised that the State and its instrumentalities must adopt a balanced and judicious approach, refraining from indiscriminately opposing claims.The Court further highlighted that frivolous and groundless litigation is a serious menace to the administration of justice, clogging an already overburdened judicial system and diverting valuable resources away from genuine causes."The present case is an unsoothing illustration of, how litigations are pursued on behalf of the State (HPSC, to be more precise, in the case in hand), in a totally mechanical and indifferent fashion. The proceedings reveal a lack of due diligence, reflective of an apathetic approach that undermines the principles of responsible governance & judicial propriety. Such conduct reflects an absence of serious application of mind, resulting in an unwarranted litigation that burdens the judicial system."Accordingly, the Court deemed it appropriate to impose costs on HPSC, ensuring they are both substantial and reflective of real-time accountability..Senior Advocate Anand Chhibbar along with Advocates Shreya B Sarin and Himanshu Malik appeared for the petitioner.Additional Advocate General Naveen S Bhardwaj represented the State authorities.Advocates Sukhdeep Singh Chhatwal and Ajaivir Singh appeared for the High Court.Advocate Balvinder Singh Sangwan appeared for the HPSC..[Read Order]