Back
2011 (8) Supreme 339
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.S. Singhvi and Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, JJ.
Union Public Service Commission — Appellant
versus
Gyan Prakash Srivastava — Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 10178 of 2011
Decided on : 30-11-2011
Facts of the Case :
The question which arose for consideration in present appeal was whether the decision of the Union Public Service Commission to reject the respondent’s candidature for the post of Legal Advisor-cum-Standing Counsel in Land and Building Department, Government of NCT of Delhi was legally correct and the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Delhi High Court committed an error by nullifying the same.
Findings of the Court :
A.Since respondent had attached with his application certificate issued by Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, which must had been issued keeping in view the fact that he possessed Degree in Law awarded by a University recognized by the Bar Council of India for the purpose of the Act and the certificates issued by different departments of the Central Government showing his employment on different posts (for two of these posts, Degree in Law was an essential qualification), the Commission was not at all justified in refusing to entertain his application for the post of Legal Advisor.
B. The rejection of respondent’s application may have been justified only if it could be shown that Allahabad University is not recognized by the Bar Council of India for the purposes of the Act or that he had not undergone a 3 year degree course in law from that University. However, it was neither pleaded case of Commission nor it had been argued that Allahabad University was not recognized by Bar Council of India or that respondent had not undergone 3 years’ course of study in law. No dispute that respondent had been appointed as Assistant (Legal) and Officer on Special Duty (Litigation) in the employment of Central Government because he was having a Degree in Law and was duly selected by Commission. Hence held that rejection of respondent’s application for the post of Legal Advisor was per se illegal and arbitrary. No error was committed by Tribunal and High Court in quashing the decision of Commission. Appeal was dismissed
JUDGMENT
G. S. Singhvi, J.
1. The question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the decision of the Union Public Service Commission (for short, ‘the Commission’) to reject the respondent’s candidature for the post of Legal Advisor-cum-Standing Counsel in Land and Building Department, Government of NCT of Delhi was legally correct and the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) and the Delhi High Court committed an error by nullifying the same.
2. After acquiring Degree in Law from Allahabad University in 1979, the respondent got himself enrolled as an Advocate with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh. He practiced in the Allahabad High Court from September 1980 to September 1986. Thereafter, he worked as Assistant (Legal), Law Officer, Assistant Director of Estates (Litigation), Vigilance-cum-Legal Officer and Officer on Special duty (Litigation) in different departments of the Central Government for over two decades.
3. In response to Advertisement No.11 issued by the Commission, which was published in Employment News 13-19 June, 2009, the respondent applied for the post of Legal Advisor (fully described in the opening paragraph of this judgment). Along with the application, he attached copies of the following documents:
(i) High School Certificate,
(ii) Degree of Bachelor of Arts awarded by Allahabad University,
(iii) Certificate issued by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh under Section 22(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961,
(iv) Certificate dated 23.5.1986 issued by the High Court Bar Association, Allahabad, and
(v) The certificates issued by different departments of the Central Government.
4. The Commission rejected the respondent’s application on the ground that he had not enclosed any document to show that he had been awarded a Degree in Law by a recognized University, which is an essential qualification for the post of Legal Advisor.
5. The respondent challenged the decision of the Commission in an application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 by asserting that even though he possesses the prescribed qualification and produced the relevant documents, the Commission arbitrarily rejected his candidature. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Commission, it was averred that the respondent’s application was rejected because he had not annexed any document to show that he had secured Degree in Law from a recognized University.
6. The Tribunal referred to paragraph 7 of the advertisement, the respondent’s reply to the questions enumerated in paragraphs 9 and 10, the details of his educational qualifications and employment in different departments of the Central Government and observed:
“What clearly emerges from the advertisement is that whereas matriculation or equivalent certificate in support of declaration of age had necessarily to be attached, it was not essential to attach the degree or diploma certificate, and it would have been permissible for a candidate to have attached other certificates in support of educational qualification. As regards degree or diploma, in the present case it would be the degree of law, and if, therefore, copy of the same was not to be attached, it was permissible to attach other certificates which may show that the candidate had the degree. Further, note-I would clearly indicate that there was not to be any compromise or concession in submitting the matriculation or equivalent certificate, like higher secondary, which was to be submitted for purpose of proof of age. Marks sheet and admit card as a proof of date of birth was not to be accepted. This strict adherence, insofar as the degree in law is concerned, was not the requirement. A combined reading of column 7 with Notes-I and II appended thereto, as reproduced above, would clearly demonstrate that whereas, matriculation or equivalent certificate as regards the proof of age had to be necessarily attached, the certificate of degree in law need not have been attached, as one
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
