IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Manoj Kumar Gupta, Donadi Ramesh, JJ.
Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission – Appellant
Versus
Renu and Others – Respondents
Special Appeal Defective No. - 781 of 2023
Decided On : 05-03-2024
Experience Certificate - Staff Nurse - U.P. Subordinate Nursing (Non-Gazetted) Service (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2016 - Rule 15
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Renu, applied for the Staff Nurse/Sister Grade–2 Examination, 2021. She secured 28.50 marks in the written examination and was given 12 marks for experience. However, her name was missing from the revised result declared on 23.8.2023 due to a mistake in her experience certificate. The Commission declined to consider the corrected certificate and rejected her representation.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that the requirement of filing documents had nothing to do with eligibility, but with proof of claims made in the online application submitted after the declaration of the result of the written examination. The Court found it improper to non-suit the petitioner on account of a mistake committed by a third party and dismissed the appeal.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was wrongly denied the benefit of experience as a Staff Nurse and whether the certificates furnished by her could be considered for awarding marks on that score.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the distinction between possessing the prescribed qualification before the cut-off date and the proof thereof, and held that in appropriate cases, there can be some relaxation in submitting the proof. The Court also considered the importance of the staff nurse position and the non-availability of eligible candidates for the vacant posts.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision of the learned Single Judge in favor of the petitioner.
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.
1. The present intra-court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Rules of Court is against the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 31.7.2023 in Writ – A No. 21430 of 2022 (Renu vs. State of U.P. and 3 others), whereby the writ petition filed by Renu, non-appellant no. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Original Writ Petitioner’) has been allowed and the order passed by the Secretary, U.P. Public Service Commission, Prayagraj (the appellant herein) (for short ‘the Commission’) dated 16.11.2022, has been set aside and a direction was issued to the Director, Medical and Health, Government of U.P., Lucknow (proforma respondent no. 4 herein) to grant benefit of experience certificate to her and consider her candidature for appointment as a Staff Nurse, if all other conditions stand satisfied.
Background Facts:
2. The U.P. Public Service Commission issued an advertisement dated 16.7.2021, notifying the holding of Staff Nurse/Sister Grade–2 (Male/Female) Examination, 2021. It was for filling up the posts of nursing staff in (a) Medical and Health Services Department (b) Medical Education and Training Department and (c) KGMU. The date of commencement of submission of online application was 16.7.2021; last date for receipt of examination fee online in the bank was 12.8.2021 and last date for submission of online application was 16.8.2021. Clause 10(4) of the advertisement stipulated that a maximum of 15 marks would be awarded to a candidate for past experience as Staff Nurse on contractual basis. For the first completed year of service, a candidate would be entitled to 3 marks. For the next and every completed year of service on contract basis, 3 marks for each year. In this regard, the certificate issued by the Competent Authority only was to be treated as valid. The said stipulation around which the controversy revolves, in the present appeal is extracted below: -
(a) Written Examination shall carry ……… Eighty Five marks.
(b) Marks to a person who is working as Staff Nurse on contract basis in the Medical and Health Services Department, Uttar Pradesh shall be awarded in the following manner subject to the maximum of fifteen marks: -
(i) For the first completed year of service on contract basis …… Three marks.
(ii) For the next and every completed year of service on contract basis, Three marks for each year. In this regard the certificate issued by the Appointing Authority only shall be treated valid. A Proforma for this purpose is available in Appendix – 6 of this advertisement.
(c) The marks obtained by each candidate under clause (a) shall, where applicable, be added to the marks obtained under clause (b).
Note : The candidates must possess all the requisite qualifications upto the last date for submitting the applications.
3. Thus, out of total 100 marks on which candidates were to be tested, 85 marks were allocated for the written examination and 15 marks for past experience in service.
4. The aforesaid stipulation was in accordance with Rule 15 of the U.P. Subordinate Nursing (Non-Gazetted) Service (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2016 (for short ‘the Rules 2016’).
5. The Original Writ Petitioner after completing all the formalities, appeared in the written examination. The result was declared on 4.1.2022 and she was shown selected. She had secured 28.50 marks in the written examination and was given 12 marks for experience. Thus, she had secured a total of 40.50 marks. After the result was declared, a Writ Petition bearing No. 1815 of 2022 (Priti Patel and another vs. State of U.P. and others) was filed challenging the result on the ground that the Commission did not properly scrutinize the experience certificates of the candidates. In the said writ petition, the Commission made statement through its counsel that it would re-scrutinize the experience certificates of 814 selected candidat
Ashok Kumar Sharma and others vs. Chander Shekhar and Another
Charles K. Skaria and others vs. Dr. C. Mathew and others
Dolly Chhanda vs. Chairman, Jee and Others
Food Corporation of India vs. Rimjhim
Gaurav Sharma vs. State of U.P.
Rajendra Patel vs. State of U.P. and Another
Ram Kumar Gijroya vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board
The State of Tamil Nadu and Others vs. G. Hemalathaa and another
The court held that procedural strictness in recruitment must be balanced with fairness, allowing exceptions for valid experience certificates issued by authorized personnel even if not counter signe....
Competitive examination - Successful completion of any competitive examination, which are having candidates of different categories based upon many factors like physically handicapped, vertical or ho....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the experience certificate should be considered valid, and the decision not to award marks for the petitioner's experience was not sustainable....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to consider experience certificates and the principles of natural justice in determining eligibility for the post of Laboratory Ass....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of a case, the principles of natural justice, and the consequences of a previous....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.