Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, J.
Ku. Deepti Pardhi, D/o Shri Hemraj Pardhi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of General Administration, Mantralaya – Respondent
WPS No. 104 of 2016
Decided on : 29-11-2023
Appointment - Assistant Professor - Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Procedure Rule - 19.2 - The court discussed the Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Procedure Rule and its provision 19.2, which states the life of the waiting list to be up to one and a half years from the date of its publication. The court highlighted the principle that candidates in the waiting list should be appointed when vacancies arise, and the inaction of the government in not appointing candidates from the waiting list without justifiable reasons is arbitrary and illegal.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner applied for the post of Assistant Professor (History) and appeared in the examination. Despite being placed in the waiting list, the petitioner was not appointed, and another candidate was appointed instead.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was entitled to be appointed as Assistant Professor (History) based on the waiting list and the inaction of the government in not appointing candidates from the waiting list without justifiable reasons was arbitrary and illegal.
Issues: The main issue was the non-appointment of the petitioner from the waiting list despite vacancies and the appointment of another candidate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the inaction of the government in not appointing candidates from the waiting list without justifiable reasons is arbitrary, bad in law, and illegal.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to consider the petitioner for appointment as Assistant Professor (History) within an outer limit of 60 days from the date of the court's order.
ORDER :
1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking following relief (s) :-
10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/direction/order against the respondent authorities to grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner in parity with the other candidate namely Ajay Pal Singh was given appointment w.e.f 15.7.2015.
10.3 The petitioner had produced the records which were available to him, however respondents may be directed to produce the entire records pertaining to the subject area of present case.
10.4 Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and cost of the petition may be awarded in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the petitioner, are as under :-
(ii) The petitioner having fulfilled all the requisite qualification applied for the post of Assistant Professor (History) ‘subject code-05’ against Other Backward Class. The application form of the petitioner was accepted by the respondent authorities and the respondent CGPSC allotted her a Roll No.109101, Bar Code-112690. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in the examination conducted on 29.11.2009 and 30.11.2009 by the respondent CGPSC for the post of Assistant Professor (History).
(iii) After completion of written examination, an interview was held by the respondent CGPSC for the 10 posts of Assistant Professor (History) and for that 30 candidates were invited including petitioner, which was in a reasonable ratio of 1:3. On 11.09.2012, the respondent CGPSC declared a select list (Annexure P/2) for the 08 posts of Assistant Professor (History), which was based on marks obtained by the candidates in written examination and interview, in that list the name of the petitioner could not find place. On the bottom of the list, the respondent CGPSC mentioned a tip that two posts (one post of UR(F) and one post of SC category) of Assistant Professor (History) were kept vacant due to pendency of writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, decision to fill those two posts would be taken in future as per further order of the Hon’ble Court.
(iv) On 07.08.2014, the respondent CGPSC issued a modified select list (Annexure P/3) of 10 candidates and a waiting list was also declared in which the petitioner was placed at Sl. No. 3 putting remark as ‘UR_W+OBC_W’. According to the petitioner, one selected candidate namely Shivali Pandey, who was at Sl. No.4 in the modified select list dated 07.08.2014, relinquished her post and after relinquishment of the post by said Shivali Pandey, one post of UR_F has fallen vacant and the petitioner who is at Sl. No.3 who is ‘UR_W+OBC_W’ in the waiting list dated 07.08.2014 is entitled to occupy the vacant post of UR_F.
(v) According to the petitioner, as per the Point No.19.2 of the ‘Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Procedure Rule’ published in Chhattisgarh Gazette dated 01.11.2014, the life of waiting list would be upto one and half yer from the date of publication of the waiting list. By virtue of point no. 19.2 of the said Rule, the waiting list dated 07.08.2014 issued by the responden
The inaction of the government in not appointing candidates from the waiting list without justifiable reasons is arbitrary, bad in law, and illegal.
The court upheld the validity of the termination of the petitioner's services, ruling that the waiting list had expired before the termination occurred, thus negating any claim for reinstatement.
If a selected candidate joins and resigns within a period of currency of waiting list, a wait listed candidate would have a right to claim appointment and this very proposition also appears to have b....
Administrative delays cannot nullify an eligible candidate's right to appointment if claims are made within the valid recruitment timeline.
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
