Case Note & Summary
The appellants, candidates for the post of Health Worker (Female) in Uttar Pradesh, applied pursuant to an advertisement dated 15.12.2021 with a last date of 05.01.2022. The advertisement required candidates to be registered with the Uttar Pradesh Nurses and Midwife Council (U.P. Council) by the last date. All appellants were originally registered with the Madhya Pradesh (M.P.) Council and had applied for U.P. Council registration before the advertisement date (except one who applied later). Due to delays in issuance of No Objection Certificate by M.P. Council and subsequent processing by U.P. Council, the appellants received their U.P. registration only after the last date of application or after the document verification process. Consequently, their candidatures were rejected for not possessing the required registration at the relevant time. The High Court dismissed their writ petition, holding that they were ineligible. The Supreme Court, in appeal, examined the facts and found that the delay in obtaining U.P. registration was not attributable to the appellants; they had applied well in time. The Court applied the ratio in Narender Singh v. State of Haryana, which holds that if there is no lapse or delay on the part of the applicant, they cannot be penalized. The High Court had erroneously treated Narender Singh as an exercise of Article 142 powers only, but the Supreme Court clarified that the legal principle laid down therein is binding. Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and directed the respondents to appoint the appellants to the post of Health Worker (Female) within six weeks, if they are otherwise meritorious and fulfill other eligibility criteria, but with benefits only from actual appointment.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Eligibility Criteria - Registration Requirement - Candidates applied for U.P. Council registration before advertisement date but received registration after last date of application/verification due to administrative delays - Held that since there was no fault on part of candidates, they cannot be made to suffer and are entitled to appointment if otherwise meritorious (Paras 4-6). B) Precedent - Narender Singh v. State of Haryana - Application of Ratio - High Court misread Narender Singh as being only an Article 142 direction - Held that the ratio in Narender Singh lays down the law that if no lapse/delay on part of applicant, they cannot be punished; Article 142 was used only to protect another employee's service (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether candidates who applied for registration before the advertisement date but received it after the last date of application or verification of documents can be denied appointment on the ground of not possessing the required registration at the relevant time.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned High Court order set aside. Respondents directed to appoint appellants to the post of Health Worker (Female) within six weeks if otherwise meritorious and fulfilling other eligibility criteria. Appellants entitled to benefits only from actual appointment. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Eligibility criteria must be considered as on last date of application
- but if delay in obtaining registration is not attributable to candidate
- they cannot be penalized
- Narender Singh v. State of Haryana applied
- High Court misread Narender Singh as being only under Article 142.
