Poonam Dwivedi vs State Of U.P

Court
Supreme Court
<div> <b>NON-REPORTABLE </b><br /> 2026 INSC 351<br /> <b>IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA </b><br /> <b>CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION </b><br /> <b> </b><br /> <b>CIVIL APPEAL No. of 2026 </b><br /> (@ SLP (C) No.4001-4002 of 2023)<br /> <b> </b><br /> <b> </b><br /> <b>POONAM DWIVEDI &amp; ORS. …PETITIONER(S) </b><br /> <b> VERSUS </b><br /> <b>STATE OF U.P. &amp; ORS. …RESPONDENT(S) </b><br /> <b>WITH </b><br /> <b>CIVIL APPEAL No. of 2026 </b><br /> (@ SLP (C) No.20256 of 2023 <br /> <br /> <b>WITH </b><br /> <b>CIVIL APPEAL No. of 2026 </b><br /> (@ SLP (C) No.22042-22043 of 2023) <br /> <br /> <b>J U D G M E N T </b><br /> <b>MANOJ MISRA, J. </b><br /> <b>1.</b> <b> </b> Leave granted. <br /> <b>2.</b> <b> </b> These appeals impugn a common judgment and <br /> order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, <br /> 1<br /> Lucknow Bench, Lucknow dated 09.01.2023 in Special <br /> Signature Not Verified<br /> Digitally signed by<br /> KAVITA PAHUJA<br /> Date: 2026.04.10<br /> 17:35:21 IST<br /> Reason:<br /> Appeal Nos. 464, 465, 466 and 467 of 2022 preferred <br /> <br /> 1<br /> High Court <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>1</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> against an order of Single Judge of the High Court dated <br /> 19.10.2022 in Writ A No. 5392 of 2022 (Poonam Dwivedi <br /> v. State of U.P. and others); Writ A No.6974 of 2022 (Divya <br /> Awasthi v. State of U.P. and others); Writ A No. 6911 of <br /> 2022 (Archana Saxena v. State of U.P. and others); Writ A <br /> No. 5264 of 2022 (Komal v. State of U.P. and others) and <br /> Writ A No. 6357 of 2022 (Shanu Tiwari v. State of U.P. and <br /> others). <br /> <b>3.</b> <b> </b> On 15.12.2021, the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate <br /> 2<br /> Service Selection Commission issued an advertisement <br /> inviting applications for filling up 9212 posts of Health <br /> Workers (Female). Ten per cent posts i.e., 921 posts were <br /> 3<br /> reserved for EWS Category. Last date for submitting the <br /> application was 05.01.2022. <br /> <b>4.</b> <b> </b> Pursuant to the invite, the appellants applied <br /> under the EWS category for appointment to the post of <br /> Health Worker (Female). <br /> <b> </b><br /> <b>5.</b> Clause 8.3 of the advertisement provided: <br /> “The candidates seeking reservation/relaxation in <br /> age limit, will have to submit a caste certificate/ <br /> reservation certificate, which has been issued till the <br /> last date of application or last date of advertisement <br /> in prescribed proforma printed in the appendix of <br /> <br /> 2<br /> Commission <br /> 3<br /> Economically Weaker Section. <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>2</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> detailed advertisement and available on the website <br /> issued by the competent officer in support of <br /> reservation category and they should produce the <br /> said certificate before the Commission when <br /> required.” <br /> <br /> <b>6.</b> <b> </b> The prescribed form in which the certificate had to <br /> be submitted by a candidate for securing reservation in <br /> EWS category is as follows: <br /> Form-I <br /> Government of Uttar Pradesh <br /> Name of office: <br /> <br /> Certificate with regard to income and assets to be <br /> submitted by the member of the Economically Weaker <br /> Section <br /> <br /> Certificate No. Date: <br /> <br /> Valid for the financial year…….. <br /> It is certified that Shri/Smt/Kumari….. <br /> Son/Wife/Daugher of …………. is a permanent Resident <br /> of Village/Kasba………, Post Office……. Police Station <br /> ………. Tehsil………. District……….. State, Pin <br /> Code…………. whose attested photograph given below, <br /> is a member of economically weaker section because the <br /> total income of his family is below Rs. 8,00,000/- <br /> (Rupees eight lakh) in the financial year…… Any of the <br /> following properties are not in the ownership of his <br /> family. <br /> <br /> (i). More than 5 (five) acre cultivable agricultural <br /> land) <br /> (ii). Plot or one thousand square feet or more than <br /> area; <br /> (iii). Residential plot or more than 100 square yards <br /> within the notified municipality. <br /> <br /> 2. Shri/Smt./Kumari is a member of ……. caste, <br /> which is not notified in Scheduled Caste, Scheduled <br /> Tribe and any other backward class. <br /> <br /> Attested passport size photo of the applicant. <br /> <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>3</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> Signature (With office seal) <br /> Full Name: <br /> Designation: <br /> District <br /> Magistrate/Additional <br /> District Magistrate/City <br /> Magistrate/Pargana <br /> Magistrate/Tehsildar” <br /> <br /> <b>7.</b> <b> </b> Thus, the following dates are crucial, that is, the <br /> date of advertisement, which is, 15.12.2021; and the last <br /> date of submission of application, which is, 05.01.2022. <br /> Taking into consideration the terms of the advertisement <br /> and those dates, an EWS certificate must: <br /> (a) relate to financial year i.e., 2020 – 2021 <br /> (because prior to 05.01.2022, the preceding <br /> financial year was 2020-2021, i.e., 01.04.2020 to <br /> 31.03.2021); <br /> (b) be dated in between 01.04.2021 and <br /> 05.01.2022 (because a certificate prior to <br /> 01.04.2021 would not relate to the financial year <br /> st<br /> ending 31 March 2021 and since the certificate <br /> had to be obtained by the last date of submission <br /> of application, it cannot be later than 05.01.2022). <br /> <b>8.</b> <b> </b> The details of certificates submitted by appellants <br /> Poonam Dwivedi; Sunita Kumari; Shanu Tiwari and <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>4</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> Komal, who are petitioners 1, 2, 4 and 5 in SLP (C) No. <br /> 4000-4001 of 2023; Archana Saxena, who is petitioner in <br /> SLP (C) No. 20256 of 2023; and Anuradha Srivastava, who <br /> is petitioner in SLP (C) Petition No. 22042-22043 of 2023 <br /> are as under: <br /> (1) Poonam Dwivedi <br /> Certificate is dated 12.01.2021. It states that <br /> gross annual income of her family is less than Rs. <br /> 8 lacs for the Financial Year 2020-21 and that her <br /> family does not own any of the following assets <br /> during financial year 2020-2021: <br /> (a) Agricultural property above 5 Acres; <br /> (b) Flat measuring 1000 sq. ft. or above; <br /> (c) Plot measuring 100 sq. yards or more in <br /> Municipal Council; <br /> (d) Residential flat of 200 sq. yards and above <br /> in areas other than the notified <br /> municipalities. <br /> The certificate discloses that it is valid for the <br /> financial year 2020-21. <br /> (2) Shanu Tiwari <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>5</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> Certificate is dated 21.01.2021 and it states that <br /> gross annual income of her family is below Rs. 8 <br /> lacs for the financial year 2019-20, and the <br /> certificate is valid for the year 2020-2021. <br /> Thereafter, the certificate goes on to recite that <br /> she does not own or possess any of the above <br /> specified assets. <br /> (3) Sunita Kumari <br /> Certificate is dated 10.01.2022. It states that the <br /> gross annual income of her family during the <br /> financial year 2021-2022 is less than Rs. 8 lacs. <br /> Thereafter, it goes on to recite that she and her <br /> family do not own any of the above specified <br /> assets. <br /> (4) Komal <br /> Certificate is dated 06.01.2021. Validity period of <br /> the certificate is not mentioned. <br /> (5) Anuradha Srivastava <br /> Certificate is dated 05.01.2021 and it states that <br /> gross annual income of her family is below Rs. 8 <br /> lacs for the financial year 2020-21. Thereafter, <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>6</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> the certificate goes on to recite that her family <br /> does not own or possess any of the above specified <br /> assets. <br /> (6) Archana Saxena <br /> Certificate is dated 05.02.2021. It states that it is <br /> valid for the financial year 2020-21. It also recites <br /> that gross annual income of her family is below <br /> Rs. 8 lacs for the financial year 2019-2020 and <br /> that her family does not own or possess any of the <br /> above specified assets. <br /> (7) Divya Awasthi <br /> Certificate is not on record. According to the <br /> respondents she had not applied under EWS <br /> category. <br /> <b>9.</b> <b> </b> Based on those certificates, the appellants applied <br /> under the EWS category and participated in the written <br /> test held on 08.05.2022. Being successful in the written <br /> test, they appeared for the next level examination. <br /> However, their names did not figure in the select list <br /> declared on 06.08.2022. Aggrieved therewith, they filed <br /> writ petitions before the High Court claiming, <i>inter-alia</i> , <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>7</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> that they had received marks higher than the last selected <br /> candidate in the EWS category, and therefore, they ought <br /> to have been placed in the merit list. <br /> <b>10.</b> <b> </b><br /> The respondents contested the writ petitions <br /> claiming, <i>inter-alia</i> , that for availing the benefit of EWS <br /> category, candidates were required to submit certificate(s) <br /> in the requisite format disclosing their financial status in <br /> the financial year prior to the year in which they applied <br /> for selection. However, as the appellants’ certificate(s) were <br /> not in order, they were not considered in the EWS category <br /> and as their marks were lower than the last selected <br /> candidate in the unreserved (general) category, they were <br /> not placed in the select list. <br /> <b>11.</b> <b> </b> Before the writ court, on behalf of the writ <br /> petitioners (i.e., the appellants herein), it was submitted <br /> that the EWS certificate is issued by agencies of the State, <br /> th<br /> in terms of the Government notification dated 14 March <br /> 2019, therefore, if it carries mistakes, the candidates <br /> cannot be deprived of the benefit of reservation, more so <br /> when they have been able to establish their eligibility as a <br /> candidate belonging to the EWS category. Moreover, <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>8</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> confusion was created by different descriptions of the year <br /> of which the income-certificate had to be obtained. In O.M. <br /> dated 17.01.2019 of the Central Government, the year is <br /> described as <i>“financial year prior to the year of application</i> ” <br /> and in Government Order dated 18.02.2019 of the State <br /> of U.P. it is described as “ <i>year prior to the year of applying </i><br /> <i>for reservation.</i> ” Consequently, if there is any error in the <br /> certificate, the fault lies squarely on the State, for which <br /> the candidature of the appellants must not suffer. <br /> <b>12.</b> <b> </b> Upon consideration of the aforesaid submissions, <br /> the writ court i.e., the learned Single Judge of the High <br /> Court, in its judgment dated 19.10.2022, observed as <br /> follows: <br /> “11. Learned counsels for the parties agree on the <br /> aspect, which is that confusion has occurred because <br /> of different provision made in the advertisement as <br /> well as in the specimen certificate. The word &quot;financial <br /> year&quot; is not used in the advertisement but the same <br /> finds mention in the specimen certificate appended <br /> along with the advertisement. Sri Gaurav Mehrotra, <br /> learned counsel for the Commission stated that <br /> certificate should have been issued for the financial <br /> year 2020-2021 and relevant documents pertaining <br /> to the financial year 2020-2021 and it should be valid <br /> for 2020-21, for it to be accepted by the Commission. <br /> <br /> 12. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused <br /> the record. <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>9</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> 13. It is seen that petitioners have approached this <br /> Court with common prayer that EWS certificate <br /> submitted by them along with their application form <br /> was rejected by the Commission on the ground that <br /> same was not filled up correctly with regard to the <br /> annual income of the candidate and his/her family in <br /> the financial year. The competent authority wrongly <br /> filled up the income as well as year in the certificates <br /> issued by him. <br /> 14. It is needless to say that guidelines have been <br /> issued by the State Government relying upon the <br /> Office Memorandum issued by the Government of <br /> India but the advertisement itself was vague to the <br /> extent that where term &quot;financial year&quot; was not used, <br /> The Government Order dated 18.02.2019 had used <br /> terminology of &quot;year prior to the year of filling up the <br /> application form&quot; was provided for filling up the <br /> income column. <br /> 15. It is on account of aforesaid confusion that the <br /> authorities had also issued incorrect certificates. <br /> 16. It has also been informed by learned Standing <br /> Counsel on the basis of instructions received that till <br /> date appointment letters have not been issued to the <br /> selected candidates. <br /> 17. In the light of above, the matter requires <br /> interference. Considering the fact that the petitioners <br /> had qualified in the main written examination and <br /> only because of the discrepancy in their EWS <br /> certificate submitted by them which were incorrectly <br /> filled up by the competent authority, their <br /> candidature has not been considered and hence <br /> appointment letters have not been issued to them.” <br /> <br /> <b>13.</b> <b> </b> After observing as above, the learned Single Judge <br /> ordered thus: <br /> “18. In view of above, it is directed that the concerned <br /> Tehsildar who is the competent authority and who has <br /> issued EWS certificates to the petitioners shall issue <br /> fresh certificate correctly indicating the income of the <br /> candidate and his/her family members, the said <br /> income certificate shall be issued for period 2021-22 <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>10</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> and documents pertaining to financial year 2020-2021 <br /> shall be issued by the competent authority. <br /> 19. Let aforesaid exercise be completed within a period <br /> of two weeks from the date of production of certified <br /> copy of this order before the competent authority and <br /> fresh certificate shall be issued in the light of <br /> observations made herein above and same shall be <br /> submitted to the U.P. Subordinate Service Selection <br /> Commission, within one week thereafter on issuance <br /> of the same. On receipt of such certificate(s) the <br /> Commission shall proceed to consider candidature of <br /> the petitioners on their merits before finalising the final <br /> results/issuing appointment letters. <br /> 20. Before parting with the matter this Court is of the <br /> considered view that the State Government should also <br /> look into the matter and issue necessary clarification <br /> with regard to the contents of EWS certificate and <br /> instruct the competent authorities to fill up the same <br /> legally and properly, as its incorrect issuance will <br /> adversely impact innocent candidates, who rely on the <br /> wisdom of the competent authority and presume that <br /> the certificate issued is valid and correct and in <br /> accordance with law. <br /> 21. In the light of above, the writ petitions are partly <br /> allowed.” <br /> <br /> <b>14.</b> <b> </b> Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the learned <br /> Single Judge, four Special Appeals (i.e., intra-court <br /> appeals) were filed before the Division Bench of the High <br /> Court, which were allowed by the impugned order. <br /> <b>15.</b> <b> </b> Before the Division Bench, it was argued that, <br /> admittedly, date of the advertisement was 15.12.2021; <br /> last date of submission of the application was 05.01.2022; <br /> as per clause 8 of the advertisement, candidates were <br /> required to furnish necessary documents including EWS <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>11</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> certificate in the proforma prescribed for claiming the <br /> benefit of reservation; the recruitment/ selection was <br /> being done in the year 2022, therefore, EWS certificate, <br /> which had to be of the previous year, ought to have been <br /> relatable to the financial year 2020-2021 i.e., 01.04.2020 <br /> to 31.03.2021. It was contended that since the certificates <br /> relied by the writ petitioners were obtained prior to closure <br /> of financial year 2020-2021, they were not in respect of <br /> financial year ending on 31.03.2021. Hence, those <br /> certificates were not usable for seeking EWS reservation <br /> under the advertisement. <br /> <b>16.</b> <b> </b> Upon consideration of the aforesaid submissions <br /> and the provisions of relevant Government Orders, the <br /> Division Bench of the High Court found the certificates <br /> invalid. The relevant paragraph of the impugned judgment <br /> is extracted below: <br /> “35. In the instant case, if the certificates are perused, <br /> it would indicate that they have been issued in the <br /> month of January, 2021 and February, 2021 as shall <br /> be evident from the details mentioned hereinafter:- <br /> (i) In case of Poonam Dwivedi, the certificate is dated <br /> 12.01.2021 and is valid for financial year 2020-21. <br /> Hence, the certificates cannot be valid for 2020-21 as <br /> the year had not been ended by then. <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>12</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> (ii) In the case of Archana Saxena, the certificate dated <br /> 05.02.2021 and valid for financial year 2019-20, <br /> though, it was required to be filed for the financial year <br /> 2020-21, thus, this certificate is not valid. <br /> (iii) In the case of Komal, the certificate is dated <br /> 06.01.2021 and is valid for financial year 2019. This <br /> certificate also did not relate to the year 2020-21, <br /> accordingly not valid. <br /> (iv) In the case of Shanu Tiwari, the certificate is dated <br /> 21.01.2021 and valid for financial year 2019-20. This <br /> certificate too did not relate to the financial year 2020-<br /> 21. Hence all the aforesaid certificates are not valid.” <br /> <b>17.</b> <b> </b> We have heard the learned counsel for the parties <br /> and have perused the materials on record. <br /> <b> </b><br /> <b>18.</b> The question that arises for our consideration is <br /> whether the EWS certificate(s), details of which have been <br /> provided above, could be considered valid for claiming the <br /> benefit of EWS reservation for appointment to the post <br /> concerned. <br /> <b>19.</b> <b> </b> To appropriately decide the issue, it would be <br /> useful to refer to the following dates: (i) the date of the <br /> advertisement, which is 15.12.2021; (ii) the last date of <br /> submission of application, which is 05.01.2022; and (iii) <br /> the last date for amending the application, which is <br /> 12.01.2022. <br /> <b>20.</b> <b> </b> Clause 8 of the advertisement deals with <br /> reservation. Clause 8.3 (supra) specifically deals with <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>13</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> reservation for the EWS category. It clearly provides that <br /> candidates will have to submit a caste certificate/ <br /> reservation certificate, which has been issued till the last <br /> date of application or last date of advertisement, in <br /> prescribed proforma printed in the appendix. This would <br /> indicate that the certificate must exist prior to the last date <br /> of application or the last date of advertisement and should <br /> conform to the prescribed proforma printed in the <br /> appendix. <br /> <b>21.</b> <b> </b> The appendix contains the form (i.e., Form-I) in <br /> which the certificate is to be obtained. A close look at <br /> Form-I, appended to the advertisement, would indicate <br /> that the certificate would have to disclose the financial <br /> year for which it is valid and must contain a statement <br /> that the total income of the family is below Rs. 8 lacs in <br /> the financial year concerned. Besides, it must disclose <br /> whether assets specified therein are in ownership of the <br /> family. <br /> <b>22.</b> <b> </b> The UP Public Services (Reservation for <br /> Economically Weaker Sections) Act, 2020 (for short, 2020 <br /> Act) was notified on 31.08.2020. Section 7 of the 2020 Act <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>14</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> provides that “ <i>for the purpose of reservation provided </i><br /> <i>under this Act, income and assets certificate shall be issued </i><br /> <i>by such authority or officer not below the rank of Tehsildar </i><br /> <i>in the State and in such manner and in such form as the </i><br /> <i>State Government may, by order, provide. The office </i><br /> <i>memorandum no. 1/2019/4/1/2002/ka-2/19 T.C. II, </i><br /> <i>dated 18 February 2019 shall be deemed to have been </i><br /> <i>issued under this section”. </i><br /> <b>23.</b> <b> </b> The Office Memorandum dated 18.02.2019, in <br /> para 2, provides: <br /> “2. Persons who are not covered under the existing <br /> scheme of reservations for the Scheduled Castes, the <br /> Scheduled Tribes and the Socially and Educationally <br /> Backward Classes and whose family has gross annual <br /> income below Rs. 8.00 identified as EWSS for the benefit <br /> of reservation. Family for this purpose will include the <br /> person who seeks benefit of reservation, his/her parents <br /> and siblings below the age of 18 years as also his spouse <br /> and children below the age of 18 years. The income shall <br /> include income from all sources i.e. salary, agriculture, <br /> business, profession etc., and it will be income for the <br /> financial year prior to the year of application. Also, <br /> persons whose family owns or possesses any of the <br /> following assets shall be excluded from being identified <br /> as EWSS, irrespective of the family income: <br /> (i) 5 acres of Agricultural land and above; <br /> (ii) Residential flat of 1000 sq. ft. and above; <br /> (iii) Residential plot of 100 sq. yards and above in <br /> notified municipalities; and <br /> (iv) Residential plot of 200 sq. yards and above in <br /> areas other than the notified municipalities.” <br /> (Emphasis supplied) <br /> <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>15</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> <b>24.</b> <b> </b> What is clear from above is that for availing <br /> reservation under the EWS category, income for the <br /> financial year prior to the year of application would be <br /> considered. This position is reiterated in the <br /> advertisement, which came after notification of the 2020 <br /> Act, wherein, in the appendix, the prescribed form in <br /> which the income and assets certificate is to be obtained <br /> is provided. There also, the certificate is to be in respect of <br /> the financial year. <br /> <b>25.</b> <b> </b> In such circumstances, if the certificate(s) relied <br /> upon by the appellants were not in respect of the financial <br /> year prior to the year of the application and were issued <br /> prior to even closure of the relevant financial year, there <br /> was an error apparent on the face of those certificates and, <br /> therefore, in our view, the respondents were justified in <br /> rejecting the claim of the appellants based on those <br /> certificates. <br /> <b> </b><br /> <b>26.</b> The argument on behalf of the appellants that the <br /> State should not have issued certificate(s) concerning <br /> financial year which had not closed by the date of issuance <br /> of those certificates is of no substance, because those <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>16</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> certificates were obtained even before the date of <br /> publication of the advertisement. Notably, the <br /> advertisement was issued on 15.12.2021 whereas <br /> certificate(s), except that of Sunita Kumari, were of <br /> January and February 2021. Therefore, those candidates <br /> could have applied for fresh certificates in terms of the <br /> advertisement if their earlier certificates were not in <br /> conformity with the advertisement. Insofar as Sunita <br /> Kumari is concerned, though her certificate is dated <br /> 10.01.2022, it relates to Financial Year 2021-2022, when <br /> it ought to have been in respect of Financial Year 2020-<br /> <b><i>4</i></b><br /> 2021. In <b><i>UPSC v. Gaurav Singh &amp; Ors.</i></b> , this Court held <br /> that when certificate is sought in respect of a particular <br /> financial year, certificate of a different financial year goes <br /> to the root of the eligibility of a candidate. In that light, <br /> even the certificate of Sunita Kumari was invalid for <br /> claiming the benefit of reservation. In such circumstances, <br /> we do not find any good reason to interfere with the order <br /> passed by the High Court. <br /> <br /> 4<br /> (2024) 2 SCC 605 <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>17</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> 5<br /> <b>27.</b> <b> </b> Besides, in <b><i>Divya v. Union of India and Others</i></b> , <br /> this Court has already held that for claiming reservation <br /> under EWS category, Income and Asset Certificate of the <br /> specified financial year in the prescribed form must be in <br /> possession of the candidate on or before the cut-off date. <br /> As, admittedly, the appellants did not possess the <br /> necessary certificate in the prescribed form by the cut-off <br /> date, no relief can be accorded to the appellants. <br /> <b>28.</b> <b> </b> Before parting, we would like to observe that in <br /> matters of public recruitment, where large number of <br /> candidates participate, application forms are submitted <br /> online along with the scanned eligibility documents, <br /> certificates, etc. Such applications are processed through <br /> computer applications/ software and therefore, any error <br /> in the application is bound to result in rejection of the <br /> candidature. Challenge to such a rejection must not <br /> ordinarily be entertained as it could stall expeditious <br /> completion of the recruitment process thereby frustrating <br /> thousands and lacs of aspirants. <br /> <br /> 5<br /> (2024) 1 SCC 448 <br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>18</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> <br /><br /> <b>29.</b> <b> </b> For all the reasons above, the appeals lack merit <br /> and are, accordingly, dismissed. Pending applications, if <br /> any, shall stand disposed of. There is no order as to costs. <br /> <br /> <br /> <b> ...............................J. </b><br /> <b>(Manoj Misra) </b><br /> <b> </b><br /> <b>...............................J. </b><br /> <b> </b> <b> </b> <b> </b> <b> </b> <b>(Prasanna B. Varale) </b><br /> <b> </b><br /> <br /> <b>New Delhi; </b><br /> <b>April 10, 2026</b> <b> </b><br /> Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 4001-4002/2023, <br /> SLP(C) No. 20256/2023 &amp; SLP(C) Nos. 22042-22043/2023 (Page <b>19</b> of <b>19) </b><br /> </div>