Back
2018 Supreme(Raj) 1906
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
Bheru Singh Dewara - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
C.W.P. No. 7688 of 2015
Decided On : 08-02-2018
Anil Bissa, Kuldeep Mathur, Vinod Choudhary, Advocates for the appearing parties.
Candidates who possess a special qualification before the due date and have furnished photostat copies of the relevant certificate are entitled to consideration for grant of bonus marks, even if the original certificate is not submitted at the appropriate stage.
Headnote:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - ARTICLE 226 - RAJASTHAN POLICE CONSTABLES RECRUITMENT RULES, 2012 - RULE 14 - SPECIAL QUALIFICATION - BCA DEGREE - BONUS MARKS - ENTITLEMENT - ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE NOT SUBMITTED - PHOTOSTAT COPIES FURNISHED - CONSIDERATION FOR GRANT OF MARKS - COURT DIRECTED.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner participated in the selection process for the post of Constable GD, having the qualification of BCA and other necessary eligibility. He appeared in the written examination and physical examination, securing 74.25 marks in total. The cut-off marks in the General Category were 77.125. Petitioner claimed entitlement to three bonus marks for his BCA qualification, but did not submit the original certificate.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that since the petitioner had the BCA qualification before the due date and the information along with photostat copies were available with the respondents, a lenient view should have been taken and the same should have been taken on record for grant of required marks for the said qualification.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bonus marks for his BCA qualification despite not submitting the original certificate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the precedent set in Hukma Ram Bishnoi Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., where the court held that possessing a qualification in computer proficiency was not an essential condition of eligibility but an additional qualification to avail bonus marks. The court also noted that the petitioner had qualified at all selection stages otherwise and that the denial of bonus marks for a qualification possessed before the due date would be unjust.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to consider the appointment of the petitioner in the General Category on his own merits and eligibility by giving him three more marks for the BCA qualification.
JUDGMENT
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J —This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"i. The record of the case may kindly be called for;
ii. The respondents may kindly be directed to award 3 marks to the petitioner for Special Qualification (BCA) for the post of Constables GD in pursuance to advertisement dated 14.07.2013;
iii. The respondents may kindly be directed to revise the merit list of General Category after adding marks of special qualification of the petitioner and the petitioner may kindly be selected in the final list of appointment for the post of Constables GD in pursuance to advertisement dated 14.07.2013;
iv. The respondents may kindly be directed to grant the appointment on the post of of Constable GD to the petitioner as per his merit with all consequential benefits;
v. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which the facts and circumstances of the case warrants be issued and;
vi. Costs of the writ petition be allowed in favour of the petitioner."
2. The petitioner participated in the selection process initiated vide advertisement dated 14.07.2013, whereby applications were invited for the posts of Constables GD, Constable Driver, Constable Bands and Constable Operators.
3. The petitioner was having the qualification of Bachelor of Computer Applications (BCA) and all other necessary eligibility. The petitioner appeared in the written examination and was declared successful, and thereafter, was called for physical examination scheduled on 09.01.2015.
4. The petitioner secured 58.25 marks in the written examination, 15 marks in physical examination and 01 mark for special qualification, which made his total marks to be 74.25. The cut off marks in the General Category were 77.125, and thus, the petitioner was lagging behind.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was having the special qualification of BCA, and was thus, entitled to get three more marks.
6. The petitioner however, did not give the original copy of the BCA certificate.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in respect of the selection process initiated vide advertisement dated 28.09.2012 for recruitment to the post of Constable, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Hukma Ram Bishnoi Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B.Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.317/2016 decided on 15.07.2016) , while allowing the appeal, directed the certificate to be taken on record for grant of bonus marks, even when it was made available at a subsequent stage.
8. The relevant portion of the judgment in Hukma Ram Bishnoi reads as under:-
" There will have to be a distinction between a candidate who may not have appeared at the RSCIT examination before the date of the physical efficiency test and one who had but production of pass certificate on the relevant date was beyond his control. In case of the former the condition in the advertisement will be mandatory but in the latter case directory as construed in Charles K. Skaria . Possessing a qualification in computer proficiency was not an essential condition of eligibility but an additional qualification to avail bonus marks.
6. The appellant has qualified at all selection stages otherwise. The festering sense of injustice for which he finds himself at his wits end, still at the threshold of his career necessitates an interpretation which advances the cause of justice and does not stultify it devoid of life with aridity.
7. In Uma Shankar Sharma v. Union of India , (1980) 3 SCC 202 the appellant was appointed against the sports quota but terminated subsequently on the ground that he had been selected for inter university participation and had submitted the requisite certificate also but had not actually participated as he had fallen ill. Setting aside the termination it was observed as follows :-
"5......The terms and conditions of service are intended to be construed reasonably, and too technical a view can defeat the ess
