http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: DILWAN SINGH & ORS. ETC.ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       25/03/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  JT 1996 (4)   248        1996 SCALE  (3)553

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                             WITH              CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6888-90 OF 1996        (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 21297-99 of 1994)                          O R D E R      Though the respondents were served is SLP (C) No.21297- 99/94, respondents  1  and  4  appear  through  counsel.  In respect of  respondents 2  and  3,  neither  A.D.  Card  nor unserved original  notice have  been  received  back.  Under those circumstances,  they  must  be  deemed  to  have  been served.      Leave granted.      It is  contended by Shri Mahabir Singh, learned counsel for the  appellants that  the selection  Board has adopted a policy  of  calling  the  ex-servicemen  and  the  dependent children of  the ex-servicemen  together to  consider  their cases for  recruitment according  to merit which would stand an impediment  to the  ex-servicemen. We  find force  in the contention. The  object of  reservation of the ex-servicemen is to  rehabilitate them  after  their  discharge  from  the defence services.  As per  the instructions  issued  by  the State Government,  in the absence of availability of the ex- servicemen instead  of keeping  those  posts  unfilled,  the dependent children, namely, son or daughter of ex-servicemen would also  to be  considered. The  object thereby  would be that the Selection Board should first consider the claims of the ex-servicemen  and  have  their  eligibility  considered independently it the first instance before the claims of the dependent children  of the  ex-servicemen are considered. If they are  found  eligible  and  selected,  for  the  balance unfilled posts,  the selection should be done from among the dependent children of the ex-servicemen.      The other question that arises in this case is: whether the contesting respondents have satisfied the requirement as dependants of  the ex-servicemen?  The Government of Haryana have clarified  in their  letter  dated  November  2],  1980 bearings No,12/37/79/GSII  that the  Government have taken a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

policy decision  on July  1, 1980  and given instructions to recruit the  children, i.e.  dependent sons  or daughters of ex-servicemen   who    fulfill   all   the   conditions   of qualifications, age  and other  criteria prescribed  for the post; they  may  be  considered  on  merits  for  the  posts reserved for the ex-servicemen to the unfilled posts. It was confined  initially   only  to   dependent   children   When clarification was  sought for,  various criteria  have  been suggested to  identify the  defendants. The  Government have examined the matter and found that only an unemployed person who is  a member  of the point family and contributes to the pool of  the family  income by  lending help or a person who has already  done has graduation or is doing post-graduation and getting  merit  scholarship  for  the  studies  is  also eligible to  be considered for appointment. In appeals @ SLP (C) No.21297-99/94,  it is  specifically  averred  that  the contesting  respondents  have  not  fulfilled  the  criteria referred to  hereinbefore and  that, therefore, they are not eligible to be considered.      Counter-affidavit has  been  filed  on  behalf  of  the respondent-Selection Board  contending that the Sainik Board had  issued   a  certificate   stating  that  they  are  the dependants of  the ex-servicemen.  On that  basis, they  had become eligible  for consideration.  The Board  had accepted the same.  It  did  not  have  any  source  for  independent verification and,  therefore, they  have  accepted  them  as dependants. We  are of  the  view  that  the  Board  is  not justified in  law to  take such a stand. The Board being the recruiting agency,  it is  its duty  to verify  and find out whether a  candidate who  has laid  his claim as a dependant son or daughter of the deceased ex-servicemen, fulfilled the criteria  referred   to  earlier   for  recruitment  to  the vacancies reserved  for unfilled  posts of ex-servicemen. On being satisfied,  the other  consideration has  to be looked into and  selection process could be made and candidates are selected according  to prescribed  procedure. It  being  the primary duty  of the Selection Board, it cannot abdicate its function by  merely relying  on certificate  issued  by  the Sainik  Board   which  is   only  a  recommending  authority certifying that  the candidate  as a  dependent of  the  ex- servicemen It  may be  accepted only a Prima facie evidence. The certificate  does not  ipso facto  became conclusive nor would it  entitle  the  candidate  to  be  considered  as  a dependant of the ex-servicemen. It would be for the Board to examine and  in case  of any  doubt, it should call upon the candidate  to  satisfy  the  Board  that  the  candidate  is dependant and  fulfills the  requirements prescribed  in the guidelines. That was not done in these cases.      Under these  circumstances, the  appeals  are  allowed. There shall  be a  direction to the first respondent to call upon the  candidates to satisfy the requirements referred to hereinbefore and  then- process their applications according to law  and consider  their cases against the unfilled posts reserved for  the ex-servicemen within a period of six weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. No costs.