New Delhi: A job advertisement published in a newspaper has landed a railway vendor in trouble with the IRCTC. The vendor sought applications from candidates from a specific community.
Brandavan Food Products put out an ad seeking 100 candidates for three posts — train catering manager, base kitchen manager and store manager — and said candidates should belong to the ‘Agrawal Vaish Community’ and have “good family background”, besides educational qualification of ’10+2′.
It went on to clearly specify that it did not want applicants who were Dalit, from backward communities, or women.
The matter came to light when an image of the ad surfaced on Twitter, leading to netizens immediately criticising the government and the company for being discriminatory.
The Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation (IRCTC) Thursday said the company, a subsidiary of RK Associates and Hoteliers, had removed its human resource personnel who posted the ad.
“Serious view is taken by the IRCTC and the contractor has been asked to refrain giving notice on caste lines but to recruit suitable persons belonging to any caste/creed/religion or region,” a senior official of railways said, according to PTI.
Brandavan Food Product also issued an apology to IRCTC saying its objective was “not to hurt anyone” and that they are open to offering the job to “suitable, eligible and skilled candidates”.
The letter further clarified that a revised advertisement would be issued.
Social media users called out the company for showing a caste bias.
“Shameful and disgusting! Even the private operators will give job on the basis of caste?? Haven’t we divided our Country enough?” said Shahab Jafri, a Twitter user.
Another user blamed the political classes and said casteism was being promoted in every sphere for votes. “There shouldn’t be any casteism, but politicians promote it to divide castes and get votes,” she said.
BJP leader Sanjay Yadav also tweeted out a photo of the ad.
(With inputs from Rahul Sampal)
Also read: Twitter caught in caste controversy again, users say it discriminates against SC, ST, OBCs