2011 Supreme(Cal) 1556
High Court Of Calcutta
Pratap Kumar Ray, Md. Abdul Ghani, J.
Kamalaksha Gangopadhyay : Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal : Respondent
W. P.S.T. No.536 of 2009
Decided On : Dec 23, 2011
L.K.Gupta, S.Ghosh, Milan Chandra Bhattacharya, Sulagna Bhattacharya, G.P.Banerjee, Amal Baran Chatterjee, Swapan Kumar Chatterjee, Amalendu Mitra
The omission of a material qualification in an advertisement for a public office renders the selection process void ab initio.
Headnote:
The Court quashed the selection of the Principal, Government College of Art and Craft, Kolkata, made by the Public Service Commission (PSC) and directed the PSC to initiate a fresh selection process in accordance with the law.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a challenge to the selection of the Principal of the Government College of Art and Craft, Kolkata, made by the PSC. The selection was challenged on the grounds that the PSC had omitted to publish the desirable qualification in the advertisement, that the selection process was biased, and that the selected candidate did not possess the essential qualification.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the PSC had indeed omitted to publish the desirable qualification in the advertisement, that the selection process was biased, and that the selected candidate did not possess the essential qualification. The Court held that the omission of the desirable qualification in the advertisement was a material omission that rendered the selection process void ab initio.
Issues: The issues in the case were: (1) Whether the PSC had omitted to publish the desirable qualification in the advertisement; (2) Whether the selection process was biased; (3) Whether the selected candidate possessed the essential qualification.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that: (1) The PSC had indeed omitted to publish the desirable qualification in the advertisement; (2) The selection process was biased; (3) The selected candidate did not possess the essential qualification. The Court held that the omission of the desirable qualification in the advertisement was a material omission that rendered the selection process void ab initio.
Final Decision: The Court quashed the selection of the Principal, Government College of Art and Craft, Kolkata, made by the PSC and directed the PSC to initiate a fresh selection process in accordance with the law.
PRATAP KUMAR RAY, J.
1. ASSAILING the order 7th July, 2009 passed in O.A. No.2543 of 2006 by West Bengal Administrative Tribunal, this writ application has been filed. Selection made by the West Bengal Public Service Commission for recruitment to the post of Principal, Government College of Art and Craft and subsequent action of the State of West Bengal appointing the writ petitioner, who was a lecturer in the field of Commercial Art of that College at that time, to the post of Principal, Government Art and Craft College, Kolkata, became the subject matter of challenge before the learned Tribunal in the original application filed by Monoj Kumar Sarkar, the respondent No.4 of this writ application, who at the material time was acting as Principal-in-Charge, Government Art and Craft College, Kolkata.
2. IN the original application selection of writ petitioner was assailed on the grounds of non-fulfillment of essential qualification by the present writ petitioner, Sri Kamalaksha Gangopadhyay, namely, Artist in the field of Fine Arts, adequate administrative experience, teaching experience, the age bar parameters and on bias attitude of one of the members of the selection committee who acted as adviser in selection process and who was erstwhile Principal of the said College, in favour the writ petitioner, and merit of writ petitioner to hold the post of Principal by making comparative analysis of applicant's superior merit than writ petitioner satisfying all essential qualifications in terms of recruitment rule including the desirable qualifications prescribed under the said rule. Parties exchanged their respective affidavits before the learned tribunal below. Learned tribunal allowed original application on holding lack of sufficient administrative experience by writ petitioner, the first empanelled candidate, who was recommended by Public Service Commission, the bias attitude in favour of writ petitioner by one of the members of the selection committee who was erstwhile Principal of the said College and on major point of non-mentioning of desirable qualification in the vacancy advertisement, made by the Public Service Commission, though under the recruitment rule desirable qualification is specifically identified as a qualification for the said post.
3. THE present writ petitioner whose selection and appointment was under challenge, admittedly was holding the post of lecturer in Graphic design, a post in Commercial Art and not in fine Arts group, in the said College at the material time. His teaching experience and work field were dealt with adversely by the learned tribunal by a lengthy discussion of the issue on taking note of recruitment rules namely recruitment rules regulating the recruitment to the post of Principal of said college which is in the West Bengal Senior Educational Service, framed by the Hon'ble Governor in exercise of the power conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, hereinafter for brevity, referred to as 'recruitment rule', the advertisement issued by Public Service Commission being advertisement No.4/2005 inviting applications from the eligible candidates of fine Arts field and desirable qualification which is specified in qualification head for the said post in the said recruitment rule.
4. THIS point that in the vacancy advertisement issued by the Public Service Commission, West Bengal, the desirable qualification was not mentioned and was omitted intentionally, was not pleaded by the applicant of original application, but subsequently at the time of hearing and argument, as it appears from the judgement of learned Tribunal below, this point was answered by respective parties and Tribunal dealt with that point which became the major decision making point to reach the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal. The impugned order reads such:-
" THIS is an application under Section-19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, filed at the instance of present petiti