GOKULGIRI SURESHGIRI GOSAI vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9740 of 2026
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6882 of 2026
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2026
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6882 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE Sd/-
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
================================================================
GOKULGIRI SURESHGIRI GOSAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR SAHIL TRIVEDI AGP for t Respondent(s) No. 1 (SCA-9740/2026)
MS FORUM SUKHADWALA AGP for Respondent(s) No. 1(SCA-6882/2026)
MR PREMAL R JOSHI(1327) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 28/10/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Both the writ petitions raise a common issue as to whether
the petitioner was possessing a Non Creamy Layer Certificate
[“ NCL Certificate” for short] during the relevant period as
prescribed in the Recruitment advertisement. In Special Civil
Application No.9740 of 2026, the petitioner had applied for the
post of Range Forest Officer, Class-II, pursuant to the
advertisement No.135/2024 issued by the respondent No.2
Gujarat Public Service Commission [ “GPSC” for short]. In Special
Civil Application No.6882 of 2026, the petitioner had applied for
the post of Assistant Director (IT), Class-I, pursuant to the
advertisement No.108/2024-2025 under the Science &
Page 1 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
Technology Department. Both the petitioners had submitted
their application forms for the said posts under the SEBC quota
and were possessing NCL Certificate at the time of the
application. That the petitioners were issued call letters for the
Written Examination. Accordingly, the list of eligible candidates
came to be published wherein the petitioners were declared as
successful candidates having qualified the Written Examination.
That the respondent No.2 GPSC issued a document verification
notice directing the eligible candidates to upload the required
documents between the specific period. It is the case of the
petitioners that earlier no specific cut off dates in respect of NCL
Certificate were intimated by the respondent No.2 GPSC. It is the
case of the petitioner in Special Civil Application No.9740 of
2026 that the petitioner received a auto generated email from the
respondent No.2 directing the petitioner to upload valid NCL
Certificate issued specifically between 01.04.2023 to 18.08.2025.
It is the case of the petitioner in Special Civil Application
No.6882 of 2026 that she was directed to upload the NCL
Certificate specifically between 01.04.2023 to 26.09.2025. It is
the case of the petitioners that they had uploaded the valid NCL
Certificate on the date of filling up of the application forms
pursuant to the advertisement for recruitment. However, in
respect of the said stipulated period, the petitioners were not
holding a valid NCL Certificate as on the date of uploading the
documents for document verification. Therefore, the candidature
of both the petitioners came to be rejected by the respondent
No.2 GPSC in SEBC category. By the present writ petitions, the
petitioners have impugned the rejection of their candidature in
the SEBC category in respective recruitment process.
Page 2 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
2. Mr. Vaibhav Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioner in
Special Civil Application No.9740 of 2026 and Mr. V.D.Davda,
learned advocate for the petitioner in Special Civil Application
No.6882 of 2026 have submitted that the petitioners had a valid
NCL Certificate on the date of submitting of the application
forms as well as on the last date on which such applications
could be submitted by the candidates. The petitioners were
possessing the NCL Certificate which was issued prior to
submission of the online application as well as on the date of
uploading of the documents. The learned counsels submit that
the petitioners were possessing necessary eligibility criteria for
the appointment on said posts. The learned counsels submits
that the eligibility of the candidates has to be seen as on the last
date of submission of the application forms. It is submitted that
the NCL Certificate of the petitioners had expired after the last
date of submission of the forms for the recruitment process. It is
further submitted that the petitioners have also obtained fresh
NCL Certificate which covers the financial year during which
such recruitment process has been undertaken. The learned
counsels submit that even if the petitioners were not having a
Certificate issued within the stipulated time as per the
respondent No.2 GPSC, the fresh certificates so issued to the
petitioners did cover the financial year which during which the
recruitment process had been undertaken and therefore also,
the eligibility of the petitioners had not extinguished upon expiry
of the earlier NCL Certificate issued in favour of the petitioners.
It is submitted that the NCL Certificate is issued on the basis of
family income of the candidate and is valid for 3 financial years.
It is submitted that the earlier Certificate which expired during
the recruitment process and the fresh Certificate which was
Page 3 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
obtained after the cut off date prescribed by the respondent No.2
GPSC, both the Certificates covered the status of the petitioners
as in NCL category for the financial year in which the
recruitment had taken place. The learned counsels further
submit that it is nobody’s case that in the interregnum the
status of the petitioners had changed and that they were not
belonging to the NCL category. The learned counsels have
submitted that the purpose of submitting the NCL Certificate is
to give benefit to the candidate who belongs to SEBC category. In
the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioners belong
to SEBC category. Further, it is not in dispute that the fresh
Certificates cover the period during which the petitioners did not
hold the valid NCL Certificate. It is, therefore, submitted that the
petitioners have never lost their status as NCL category
candidates even if they were not holding any valid NCL
Certificate during the stipulated period.
3. In support of his contention, Mr. Vaibhav Vyas, learned
advocate for the petitioner in Special Civil Application No.9740
of 2026 has relied upon the judgment in case of Dolly Chhanda
v. Chairman, JEE & Ors. - (2005) 9 SCC 779 and has relied upon
para-7 thereof in particular which holds that in order to avail of
the benefit of reservation or weightage, etc. necessary certificates
have to be produced. These documents are in the nature of proof
of holding of particular qualification or percentage of marks
secured or entitlement to benefit of reservation. Depending upon
the facts of a case, there can be some relaxation in the matter of
submission of proof and it will not be proper to apply any rigid
principle as it pertains in the domain of procedure. Every
infraction of the rule relating to submission of proof need not
Page 4 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
necessarily result in rejection of candidature. The learned
counsel has further relied upon another judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in case of Ram Kumar Gijroya v. Delhi
Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr. - (2016) 4 SCC 754.
The learned counsel has relied upon paras 14 and 16 thereof
which hold that the petitioners therein were entitled as per OBC
Certificate of which the provisional select list was published to
claim reservation of OBC category and that the candidature of
such candidate could not be rejected on account of late
submission of Caste Certificate. It has been further held that in
order to be considered for the post of reserved category, the
requirement is that the person should belong to such reserved
category. If a person is a reserved category candidate then he is
so by birth and not by acquisition of this category because of any
other event happening at a later stage. The Certificate issued by
the competent authority is only an affirmation of fact which is
already in existence. The purpose of such certificate is to enable
the authorities to believe in the assertion of the candidate that
he belongs to such category. The learned counsel has further
relied on another judgment of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal
arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.14948 of 2016
dated 28.09.2022 wherein it has been held that the petitioner in
the said case was completely covered by the decision rendered in
case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (supra). Thus, the learned counsel
Mr. Vaibhav Vyas submits that even though the petitioner did
not hold a valid NCL Certificate within the stipulated period of
time as indicated by the respondent No.2 GPSC, the subsequent
fresh certificate obtained by the petitioner ought to have been
accepted and the benefit of such Certificate ought to have been
granted to the petitioner and thereby allowing him to be
Page 5 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
permitted to appear in the next stage of selection. He submits
that the petitioner in Special Civil Application No.9740 of 2026
be permitted to participate in the further process of selection and
the said writ petition be allowed.
4. Mr. V.D.Davda, learned advocate for the petitioner in
Special Civil Application No.6882 of 2026 in addition to relying
upon the submissions advanced by learned counsel Mr. Vaibhav
Vyas, has also relied upon the judgment dated 10.12.2025 of the
Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) 8304/2025
and connected matters wherein a similar issue had been raised
before the Delhi High Court. He submits that in the said
judgment, the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has held
that the cut off period stipulated by the U.P.S.C. in the said case
was arbitrary and the power to stipulate eligibility criteria is not
unlimited and cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner. That
the cut off dates as prescribed in the recruitment process therein
did not have any rational and it ought to have been achieved by
way of reservation in public employment and the OBC, NLC
Certificates produced by the candidates in those petitions were
valid for the relevant year of examination and that the cut off
period must correspond to the said financial year. The learned
counsel has submitted that the said judgment of the Delhi High
Court squarely covers the facts in the present case and hence,
Special Civil Application No.6882 of 2026 also be allowed and
the petitioner be permitted to participate in the selection
process.
5. Per contra, Mr. Premal R. Joshi, learned advocate for the
respondent No.2 GPSC submits that the petitioners had applied
Page 6 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
for the recruitment process in the SEBC category under the
relevant recruitment process respectively. He submits that both
the petitioners came to be declared ineligible since they had not
uploaded the Non Creamy Layer Certificate [“ NCL Certificate” for
short] within the prescribed period as declared by the
respondent No.2 GPSC. He submits that in Special Civil
Application No.9740 of 2026, the respondent No.2 GPSC had
prescribed that the NCL Certificate should have been issued for
the period between 01.04.2023 to 18.08.2025 i.e. the last date of
uploading the Mains Examination Form in the Written
Examination and that in Special Civil Application No.6882 of
2026, the petitioner had to upload the valid NCL Certificate for
the period between 01.04.2023 to 26.09.2025 i.e. the last date of
uploading the documents for verification. The learned counsel
submits that admittedly both the petitioners did not upload such
valid NCL Certificates in the prescribed format. He submits that
thereafter the petitioners were communicated through email to
submit documents within 3 days by giving them another
opportunity before their candidature came to be cancelled. The
learned counsel submits that the petitioners also did not comply
with the condition within the said time period and accordingly,
the candidature of the petitioners came to be cancelled. The
learned counsel submits that such a condition is also stipulated
for other reserved category candidates like OBC for production of
NCL Certificate. The learned counsel therefore submits that no
relaxation should be granted in the present case as enough
opportunity was granted to the petitioners to upload the
requisite documents. He submits that the requisite document
has not been uploaded because the candidates were never in
possession of the same. He submits that since the petitioners
Page 7 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
have not uploaded the requisite documents, the petitioners are
considered as General category candidates as if they have not
availed any relaxation in the SEBC category. The learned counsel
submits that in case of the petitioner in Special Civil Application
No.9740 of 2026, the petitioner had sought age relaxation in
SEBC category. Since he could not submit the requisite
Certificate, the petitioner is considered over aged and
accordingly, his candidature has been cancelled.
6. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 GPSC has
relied upon the judgment dated 09.07.2026 of the Coordinate
Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No. 9082 of
2026. He submits that the said judgment of the Coordinate
Bench has specifically held that if the recruitment advertisement
stipulates terms and conditions for the post in question, the
requisite Certificate has to be issued on or before the last date as
prescribed for uploading the documents. He submits that the
learned Single Judge has held that if such Certificate is obtained
thereafter, after the governing terms of the advertisement, then,
the said Certificate cannot relate back to the relevant date so as
to confer eligibility. The learned counsel submits that the said
judgment of the learned Single Judge came to be challenged by
way of Letters Patent Appeal No.829 of 2026. He submits that by
order dated 13.10.2026, the Division Bench has upheld the
judgment of the learned Single Judge. He, therefore, submits
that the present Special Civil Applications be dismissed.
7. Heard learned counsels for the parties, perused the
documents and considered the submissions.
8. Admittedly in the present case, the petitioners have not
Page 8 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
adhered to the terms and conditions of the advertisement in
question. The advertisement in question specifically stated in
Clause 6 that the candidate has to upload the NCL Certificate
along with the requisite documents in case they are claiming the
benefits of the same and that such Certificate should be within
the stipulated time period which would be intimated later to
candidates. Accordingly, by communication dated 02.08.2025,
the respondent No.2 has intimated to all the candidates that the
NCL Certificate to be uploaded by the candidate has to be issued
between 01.04.2023 to 18.08.2025 in case of petitioner in
Special Civil Application No.9740 of 2026 and in case of the
petitioner in Special Civil Application No.6882 of 2026, the
petitioner was directed to upload the NCL Certificate issued
between 01.04.2023 to 26.09.2025. In both the cases,
admittedly, the petitioners did not hold any valid Certificate
issued during the said period. Further, the NCL Certificates
uploaded by the petitioners at the time of filling up of the
applications had expired before the stage of document
verification. Both the petitioners herein have admittedly obtained
fresh NCL Certificates post the last date of verification of
documents. The learned counsels for the petitioners have argued
that even if the fresh Certificates obtained by the petitioners
were post the last date of verification of documents, the said
Certificates were valid for the financial year in which the
recruitment process took place and therefore, the said document
even if submitted later on ought to have been considered by the
respondent No.2 GPSC since it did not change the category of
the petitioners as being from NCL category. Such an argument is
fallacious. Even if the fresh NCL Certificates issued in favour of
the petitioners were for the financial year in which the
Page 9 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
recruitment took place. However, as on the date of uploading the
documents for verification, the petitioners did not hold any valid
NCL Certificates in their favour and therefore, it cannot be said
that on the date on which the documents were to be uploaded
for verification, the petitioners were holding a valid NCL
Certificate in their favour.
9. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in Special Civil
Application No.9082 of 2026 vide order dated 09.07.2026 has
held thus:-
“7. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties and upon perusal of the material placed on record, it emerges
that the following factual aspects are not in dispute and, therefore,
deserve consideration:
(i) It is an admitted position that the petitioner was issued
an Economically Weaker Section (EWS) certificate on
08.08.2022, which remained valid up to 07.08.2025.
(ii) It is further not in dispute that the online applications for
recruitment to the post of Assistant Director (IT), Class-I were
invited during the period from 01.02.2025 to 17.02.2025. Thus,
on the last date prescribed for submission of the application, the
petitioner was admittedly holding a valid EWS certificate and
was, therefore, eligible to claim the benefit of reservation under
the EWS Female category at the stage of submitting her
application.
(iii) However, it is equally undisputed that the process of
uploading the requisite documents was scheduled between
17.09.2025 and 26.09.2025. By that stage, the petitioner’s EWS
certificate had already expired on 07.08.2025. Consequently,
the EWS certificate sought to be relied upon by the petitioner at
the stage of document verification was no longer valid. Thus, the
claim of the petitioner for consideration under the EWS Female
category, at the stage of scrutiny of documents, rested upon a
certificate whose period of validity had admittedly expired prior
to the commencement of the document uploading process.
8. Keeping in view the aforesaid undisputed factual matrix, if the
terms and conditions of the advertisement are examined, more
particularly Clause 9 thereof, it unequivocally stipulates that in the
recruitment process for the post in question, the requisite certificate
Page 10 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
must have been issued on or before the last date prescribed for
uploading the documents. The language employed in the said clause is
explicit and leaves no scope for any other interpretation. Consequently,
any certificate issued subsequent to the last date prescribed for
uploading the documents, notwithstanding that it may have been
obtained during the pendency of the recruitment process, cannot be
accorded recognition for the purpose of determining the eligibility of a
candidate under the reserved category. In the facts of the present case,
though the petitioner admittedly possessed a valid EWS certificate at
the time of submitting the online application, the said certificate had
expired before the commencement of the document-uploading process.
Admittedly, the renewed EWS certificate came to be issued only on
04.11.2025, i.e. much after the expiry of the last date prescribed for
uploading the requisite documents.
9. In view of the aforesaid factual and legal position, this Court is
of the considered opinion that the petitioner cannot claim the benefit of
reservation under the EWS Female category on the strength of the
subsequently issued EWS certificate dated 04.11.2025. Once the
governing terms of the advertisement specifically mandate that the
requisite certificate must exist on or before the last date prescribed for
uploading the documents, a certificate obtained thereafter cannot relate
back to the relevant date so as to confer eligibility. The conditions
contained in the advertisement are binding upon all candidates alike
and are required to be applied uniformly. Therefore, no equitable right
can be claimed by the petitioner on the basis of the EWS certificate
dated 04.11. H 2025, which admittedly came into existence after the cut-
off date prescribed under the advertisement.”
10. The said judgment of the learned Single Judge came to be
challenged before the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal
No.829 of 2026. By order dated 13.10.2026, the Division Bench
has upheld the judgment of the learned Single Judge.
11. It is also pertinent to mention here that the order dated
09.07.2026 in Special Civil Application No.9082 of 2026 passed
by the learned Single Judge is squarely applicable to the
petitioner in Special Civil Application No.6882 of 2026 since it is
of the same recruitment process and for the same post. However,
only the category differs.
12. Further, the judgments relied upon by the learned
Page 11 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/9740/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240493722026)
counsels for the petitioners are not applicable in the facts and
circumstances of the present case. The same will be of no avail
to the petitioners as the said judgments are distinguishable on
the facts of the present case.
For the aforesaid observations and reasons, the present
Special Civil Applications are devoid of merits and are
accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
In view of dismissal of Special Civil Application No.6882 of
2026, Civil Application No.1 of 2026 for stay does not survive
and disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN
Page 12 of 12
Uploaded by KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN(HC00197) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:13 IST 2026