2026:JHHC:11567-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 58 of 2026 Narendra Kumar Tiwari, S/o Late Atma Nand Tiwari, R/o Gayatri Nagar, Piparakala, P.O. & P.S.-Garhwa, District-Garhwa ….. Appellant Versus 1. Jharkhand Public Service Commission, through its Chairman, Ranchi 2. The Secretary, Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi 3. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi 4. The State of Jharkhand, through Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Ranchi ….. Respondents ----- CORAM HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Appellant: Mr. Shailesh Poddar, Advocate For the Res.-JPSC: Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate ----- 02/21.04.2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal challenges the learned Single Judge’s order dated 27.11.2025 dismissing the appellant’s/petitioner’s W.P. (S) No. 3425 of 2013. The appellant’s grievance is that he was not given the benefit of the sports quota in breach of the State’s reservation policy in this regard. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant admits that the eligibility criteria for horizontal reservation under the sports quota have been laid down vide Resolution No. 1709 dated 12.09.2007 issued by the Department of Arts, Culture, Sports & Youth Affairs, Jharkhand. The relevant portion of this Resolution reads as follows: “…………………… The State Government is implementing new policy extending 2%, reservation to the sportsperson in all State Government vacancies. For appointment on the reserved posts following standard for achievement in sports is decided for direct appointment in Class-II: 2026:JHHC:11567-DB 2 Level of Competition Achievement Class of posts for direct appointment (i)Competition organized by International Olympic Committee or Federations associated with it. (ii) National Championship level Competition organized by Indian Olympic Association or Federations associated with it. (iii) National Level Competition Medal First Place International Record Class-II [For example:- Deputy Police Superintendent, Assistant Forest Conservator, Assistant Director (Sports) etc.] 4. The appellant relies upon a certificate at page No. 54 of the paper book concerning the Taekwondo Championships, 1997. Learned counsel for the appellant argues that the said certificate has been issued by a Federation associated with the Indian Olympic Association. Further, he submits that the Indian Olympic Association is affiliated with the International Olympic Committee. Therefore, he submits that even the bronze medal obtained by the appellant qualifies him for the benefit of the reservation under the Resolution dated 12.09.2007. 5. With respect, the argument is entirely misconceived and has been correctly rejected in the impugned order. 6. On perusing the certificate at page No. 54, we are not too sure whether the same has been issued by any Federation or by one Mr Jimmy R. Jagtiani, International Master, Instructor & Referee. At least, the certificate does not clearly state that it has been issued by any Federation, let alone inspire any serious confidence. 7. However, even assuming that some indulgence is to be shown to the appellant and it is to be assumed that the certificate was 2026:JHHC:11567-DB 3 issued by the Taekwondo Federation of India, [which is only styled as the promoter on the certificate, but not the issuer of the certificate], still, the argument that this Federation is associated with Indian Olympic Association, which is affiliated to International Olympic Committee and therefore even a bronze medal secured by the appellant would qualify him for the benefit of reservation, cannot be accepted. Such an argument would do extreme violence to the resolution dated 12.09.2007 transcribed above. 8. The Resolution contemplates a certificate being issued by the Committee, Association or Federation. If any medal is secured at a competition organised by the International Olympic Committee or by a federation associated with it, the same would perhaps suffice. However, at a National Championship-level competition organised by the Indian Olympic Association or the Federation associated with it, the candidate must secure first place; it would not suffice to secure any medal, like second or third. Fortunately, learned counsel for the appellant did not go as far as to contest that even a participation medal would suffice. 9. From the material on record, including the certificate on page 54 of the paper book, which formed the basis of the petitioner's entire argument, we are satisfied that the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit of reservations under the sports quota. We have not addressed the status of some other certificated annexed to the petition because the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner was not relying on 2026:JHHC:11567-DB 4 them. In any event, those certificates also do not appear relevant and prima facie misleading. 10. The Learned Single Judge has correctly declined the relief to the petitioner/appellant based upon the misconceived argument now placed before us. 11. Besides, the learned Single Judge also noted that the petitioner had failed to implead necessary or even proper parties to the petition. This would be an additional ground for dismissing the writ petition, which we endorse. But, beyond this ground, on the merits, no case for interference is made out. 12. The present appeal is accordingly dismissed as meritless without any order for costs. (M. S. SONAK, C.J.) (RAJESH SHANKAR, J.) 21.04.2026 Satish/Vikas/