Back
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Ranjan Gogoi,B.K.Sharma, JJ.
Ratul Kumar Das & Ors. -Appellant
Versus
State of Assam & Ors. -Resopndent
Writ Petition (C) Nos. 2755,3288,3433 & 3590 of 2009
Decided On : 03-09-2009
The Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) conducted a competitive examination for the recruitment of candidates to various posts in the Assam Civil Service and other allied cadres. The selection process involved a preliminary examination, a main written examination, and an interview. The petitioners, who were female candidates, challenged the selection process on the ground that the APSC had not called them for the interview though they had secured higher marks than their male counterparts of a particular category. The petitioners also raised concerns about the evaluation of answer scripts, the allocation of marks to candidates, and the qualifications of the Controller and Assistant Controller of Examination. The Court held that the APSC had erred in its application of the law relating to horizontal and vertical reservation. The Court clarified that reservation for women is a horizontal reservation and is not over and above the vertical reservation provided to different categories like S.C., S.T., O.B.C., etc. The Court also found that the APSC had committed errors in the evaluation of answer scripts and the allocation of marks to candidates. The Court further held that the qualifications of the Controller and Assistant Controller of Examination were not in accordance with the prescribed norms. The Court set aside the final select list prepared by the APSC and directed the Commission to redo the exercise on the basis of the interviews already held, subject to the application of the correct legal principles and parameters. The Court also directed the APSC to take appropriate action to improve the functioning of the Commission and to restore public confidence in the institution.
Fact of the Case:
The Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) conducted a competitive examination for the recruitment of candidates to various posts in the Assam Civil Service and other allied cadres. The selection process involved a preliminary examination, a main written examination, and an interview. The petitioners, who were female candidates, challenged the selection process on the ground that the APSC had not called them for the interview though they had secured higher marks than their male counterparts of a particular category. The petitioners also raised concerns about the evaluation of answer scripts, the allocation of marks to candidates, and the qualifications of the Controller and Assistant Controller of Examination.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the APSC had erred in its application of the law relating to horizontal and vertical reservation. The Court clarified that reservation for women is a horizontal reservation and is not over and above the vertical reservation provided to different categories like S.C., S.T., O.B.C., etc. The Court also found that the APSC had committed errors in the evaluation of answer scripts and the allocation of marks to candidates. The Court further held that the qualifications of the Controller and Assistant Controller of Examination were not in accordance with the prescribed norms.
Issues: 1. Whether the APSC had erred in its application of the law relating to horizontal and vertical reservation? 2. Whether the APSC had committed errors in the evaluation of answer scripts and the allocation of marks to candidates? 3. Whether the qualifications of the Controller and Assistant Controller of Examination were in accordance with the prescribed norms?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the APSC had erred in its application of the law relating to horizontal and vertical reservation. The Court clarified that reservation for women is a horizontal reservation and is not over and above the vertical reservation provided to different categories like S.C., S.T., O.B.C., etc. 2. The Court found that the APSC had committed errors in the evaluation of answer scripts and the allocation of marks to candidates. 3. The Court held that the qualifications of the Controller and Assistant Controller of Examination were not in accordance with the prescribed norms.
Final Decision: The Court set aside the final select list prepared by the APSC and directed the Commission to redo the exercise on the basis of the interviews already held, subject to the application of the correct legal principles and parameters. The Court also directed the APSC to take appropriate action to improve the functioning of the Commission and to restore public confidence in the institution.
Democratic values enshrined by the Constitution can thrive and prosper only on public confidence in the institutions that the Constitution has envisaged to act as necessary support pillars. Public confidence in the Assam Public Service Commission over the years has eroded and a perception has been generated that all is not well with the said institution. Though the tenor of the language used may be mild in its suggestion, it cannot but be observed that lack of public confidence in the Public Service Commission carries ominous portents for the future. The credibility of any institution primarily depends on the conduct of the persons manning it. People of exemplary conduct exceptional ability and utmost integrity who share a serious concern for public good, alone, should be inducted into such a body. There is no room for compromise or complacency in the matter. Proper induction and necessary cleansing must be done if any institution has to earn public trust and confidence without which the constitutional goal will prove to remain an illusion. The above observations have been felt necessary in view of the perceptions with regard to the functioning of the Commission that had manifested itself in the course of the deliberations that had taken place at the prolonged hearing of these cases. The ultimate conclusion that the Court has reached in the present cases on the basis of application of the settled legal principles is by no means a vindication of the acts of the Public Service Commission and the above observations have been felt necessary to awaken a realization in the right quarters the need for an abundant measure of public confidence in the institution that alone can justify the high constitutional status bestowed on it. Having stated all that was considered necessary, the Court will now turn to the facts of the present cases.
2. An advertisement dated 10.8.2006 was issued by the Under Secretary of the Assam Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') inviting applications from eligible candidates to undergo a preliminary examination to screen candidates for the main written examination to be held for filling up 116 Nos. of posts in the Assam Civil Service and other allied cadres. Of the 116 posts advertised, 11 posts were backlog vacancies. By a corrigendum dated 5.9.2006 issued by the concerned authority of the Commission it was clarified that the provisions of the Assam Women (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Women Reservation Act) would apply to the instant selection. The preliminary examination was held on 18.11.2007 in different centers of the State wherein over 23,000 candidates had participated. The result of the preliminary examination was declared on 1.5.2008 and 5569 Nos. of candidates were shown to have qualified for the main examination. Of the qualified candidates, 4381 appeared in the main examination that was held on different dates from 7.7.2008 to 31.7.2008. The result of the main examination was declared on 1.12.2008 and call letters were issued to 507 candidates to appear in the interview.
3. Two writ petitions i.e. WP(C) Nos. 5172 and 5368 of 2008 were instituted before this Court raising a grievance that the petitioners therein, who were female candidates, had not been called for the interview though male candidates of the category to which the petitioners belonged though had secured lesser marks have been issued call letters for the interview. Both the writ petitions were disposed of by this Court by an order dated 6.1.2009 whereby acting on the stand taken by the Commission that there was an error committed by it in excluding certain candidates and not calling them for the interview, this Court had permitted the Commission to call additional candidates for the interview as prayed for. Accordingly, 93 more candidates were called for the interview by the Commission. I
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
