The central legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's qualification obtained from the Air Force did not meet the prescribed criteria for the advertised post, as per the relevant legal provisions.

JUDGMENT :

In the instant writ petition, is a very peculiar case in its own facts, and an issue, which is to be considered by this Court is:

“Whether the qualification obtained from the Air Force, could be treated to be an equivalent qualification as prescribed in the advertisement, which has had to be in accordance with the State recognised law”?

2. Facts of the case are that an advertisement was issued on 17th February 2017, by respondent No. 1, herein i.e. the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, for the purpose of conducting a process of selection as against three vacant posts of Regional Inspector (Transport), which is carrying a scale of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/-. The last date for applying in response to the said advertisement was 15th March 2017.

3. The petitioner contends that since he possessed the requisite educational qualification to be recruited for the post of Regional Inspector (Transport), and since he, being the permanent resident of the State of Uttarakhand, since residing in district Udham Singh Nagar, he had extended his candidature to be considered for appointment in pursuance to which the petitioner submits, that when he had submitted his application within the time, the respondent had processed the same and an admit card too was issued in his favour, wherein he was called upon to appear in the examination of the recruitment process with Roll Number bearing Number 300002.

4. The process of selection entail the conduct of written and practical examination, and after its culmination, a candidate was thereafter was required to present himself, before the appointing authority, for the purposes of verification of the documents, before any actual appointment is granted to the candidate as against the post advertised for which he or she had qualified the selection process.

5. Petitioner submitted that as a consequence of and under the strength of admit card, which had been issued in his favour he had participated in the written and practical examination, which was held between 20 August till 21st August 2017, and on the culmination of the same, the result was notified by the respondent vide their Notification No. 263/74-17/2017-18 dated 20th February2018. As a consequence of the result being declared and since the petitioner having being declared, as successful, at this stage itself, this Court feels it necessary to observe that merely because of the fact:-

(i) On scrutiny of the documents, admit card was issued;

(ii) On the basis of admit card, the petitioner was permitted to take the written examination, and consequently, the practical examination too;

(iii) Merely because of the fact that the result, which was notified on 20th February 2018, included his name, all these factors itself will not lead to a conclusion of a creation of any indefeasible right in favour of the petitioner, to be appointed against the post, which had been advertised on 17th February 2017, because it needs no reference that merely permitting the petitioner to participate in the selection process and even after having being declared to be qualified the same, no right of appointment is created in favour of a candidate, who had been declared to be successful.

6. As a consequence of declaration of the result on 20th February 2018, the respondent No. 1, issued a letter on 9th April 2018, calling upon such qualified candidates, whose names were disclosed in the result dated 20th February 2018, to appear before the competent authority and to produce all the documents and other testimonials, for the purposes of testing the veracity of the documents verification, based on which, the permission to participate in the written examination and the practical examination was granted by respondent No. 1, to the candidates.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 19th April 2018 i.e. the scheduled date, the petitioner approached before the respondent and had submitted all his documents as called upon by the earlier correspo