Back
1994 Supreme(All) 49
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
B.M. LAL, S.R. MISRA, JJ.
Dinesh Kumar Garg - Appellant
Versus
Public Service Commission, U. P. - Respondent
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 28563 of 1593
Decided on : Jan 19, 1994
R.G. Padia, Prakash Padiya
The UPPSC cannot arbitrarily reject the candidature of a candidate who has fulfilled the requisite qualifications.
Headnote:
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION - REJECTION OF CANDIDATURE - WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF URDU - ESSENTIAL QUALIFICATION - INTERPRETATION - WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND MANDAMUS - U.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (ADVERTISEMENTS FOR APPOINTMENT TO VARIOUS POSTS) REGULATIONS, 1980, REGS. 3(1)(A), 3(1)(B), 3(1)(C), 3(2).
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner applied for the post of District Information Officer in response to an advertisement issued by the UPPSC. The petitioner was called for an interview and was found eligible. However, after the interview, the UPPSC rejected the petitioner's candidature on the ground that he did not have working knowledge of Urdu.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the UPPSC's rejection of the petitioner's candidature was arbitrary and illegal. The court found that the petitioner had studied Urdu up to Class VIII and that he had working knowledge of Urdu. The court also found that the UPPSC had not given the petitioner an opportunity to produce a certificate of his Urdu proficiency.
Issues: Whether the UPPSC was justified in rejecting the petitioner's candidature on the ground that he did not have working knowledge of Urdu.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the UPPSC's rejection of the petitioner's candidature was arbitrary and illegal because: * The UPPSC had scrutinized the petitioner's application form with open eyes and had found him to be eligible for the interview. * The petitioner had participated in the interview and had been found to have the requisite qualifications. * The UPPSC had not given the petitioner an opportunity to produce a certificate of his Urdu proficiency.
Final Decision: The court quashed the UPPSC's order rejecting the petitioner's candidature and directed the UPPSC to declare the result of the petitioner ignoring the order of rejection of his candidature.
S. R. Misra, J.
1. By means of present writ petition, Sri Dinesh Kumar Garg seeks directions in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 3-5-1993 passed by Public Service Commission, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad respondent no. 1 and, a writ of mandamus, commanding the respondents to issue appointment letter for the post of District Information Officer to the petitioner.
2. The facts giving rise of the present petition are that in response to an advertisement issued by Public Service Commission. Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad (for short 'UPPSC'). being advertisement no. 3/89-90, for various posts, including six posts of Information Officer, in the pay scale of Rs. 770,1600, the petitioner applied for the post of District Information Officer (hereinafter referred to as the post') Necessary qualifications for the aforesaid posts are given as under :-
"Six Information Officers.......... Qualifications : Essential (1) Bachelor's Degree from a University established by law in India or a degree recognised by Government as equivalent thereto, (2) Working knowledge of Hindi, English and Urdu, (3) Diploma in Journalism. Preferential : Served in the Territorial Army for a minimum period of two years, or, obtained 'B' Certificate of National Cadet Corps."
Since the petitioner's case is confined to District Information Officer in the present petition, it is, therefore, not necessary to make any comment in regard to other posts.
3. According to the petitioner, after completion of M.A., LLB, he also did his Graduation in Diploma course in 1986 from the University of Allahabad. He also claimed that he is possessed of working experience in Journalism for a period of five years (.1-7-1984 to 1-7-1989). He also made a mention in his application that he is possessed of working knowledge in three languages, i. e., in Hindi, English and Urdu.
4. According to the petitioner, the UPPSC scrutinised the application forms of the candidates, including that of petitioner and it found the form submitted by the petitioner to be complete in all respects. It found that petitioner fulfils all necessary qualifications specified in the aforesaid advertisement.
Accordingly, the petitioner was called for an interview vide letter dated 4 3-1993 and he was interviewed on 19-4-1993. According to the procedure prescribed, the petitioner was also required to submit another form at the time of interview regarding his qualifications and other particulars in pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement.
5. The petitioner further alleges that some of the candidates, who did not fulfil essential qualifications, were not allowed to participate in the interview by the UPPSC. However, so far as petitioner is concerned, the Chairman of the Interview Board categorically made an endorsement to the effect that the petitioner was eligible for interview, and, after making all sorts of necessary quarries, the petitioner was ultimately allowed to participate in the interview.
6. However, after the aforesaid interview of the petitioner was over, all of sudden the UPPSC, through its letter dated 3-5-1993 (Annexure 9) rejected the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that he does not have working knowledge of Urdu. The exact wordings are "CHUNKI UNHE URDU KA KAHYAEARI GYAN NAHIN HAL" Thus, the candidature of the petitioner was rejected on the sole ground that he does not possess working knowledge in Urdu. Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached us by means of the present writ petition.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged in the present case and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we are finally deciding the present writ petition in accordance with Rules of the Court.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that a list of successful candidates was prepared by the UPPSC on 18-4-1993. From the material available on record, he drew our attention to the fact that in respect of another candidate, who was not possessed of r
