Back
2020 Supreme(UK) 540
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and
Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.C. Khulbe
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 58 of 2020
SANGEETA RANI – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. – Respondent
Decided on : 03.03.2020
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Learned Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Learned Brief Holder and Mr. B.D. Kandpal, Learned Counsel
Headnote:
Uttaranchal Higher Education (Group ‘A’) Service Rules, 2003, Rule 9 – Notification – Quashing of – Prayer for – Legality of – Advertisement – Conditions stipulated in – Prohibit the Public Service commission to even entertain requests for correction of entries made in online application form – It could not have considered the petitioner‘s experience as an Assistant Professor in a government degree college for a period of 10 months – Since no such information was furnished in online application form submitted by petitioner – High Court was satisfied, that Public Service Commission has not erred in not awarding petitioner bonus marks of 10% towards preferential qualification – Petition dismissed. (Paras 10 and 11)
mÙkjk[k.M mPprj f’k{kk ¼lewg ‘A’½ lsok fu;ekoyh] 2003] fu;e 9 & vfèklwpuk & ds vfHk[k.Mu & ds fy, izkFkZuk & dh oS/kkfudrk & foKkiu & esa fofgr dh x;h ‘krs± & yksd lsok vk;ksx dks vkWuykbu vkosnu i= esa dh xbZ izfof”V;ksa ds lq/kkj ds fy, izkFkZuk xzg.k djus ls izfrf”k) djrk gS & ;g 10 ekg dh vof/k ds fy, ,d ljdkjh fMxzh dkWyst esa lgk;d izksQslj ds :i esa ;kfpdkdÙkkZ ds vuqHko ij fopkj ugha dj ldrh Fkh & pw¡fd ;kfpdkdrhZ }kjk izLrqr fd;s x;s vkWuykbu vkosnu i= esa ,slh dksbZ lwpuk ugha nh xbZ Fkh & vr% mPp U;k;ky; bl rF; ls lUrq”V Fkh fd yksd lsok vk;ksx ;kfpdkdrhZ dks vf/kekuh ;ksX;rk ds izfr 10 izfr’kr cksul vad iznku u djus esa =qfV dkfjr ugha dh gS & ;kfpdk [kkfjtA ¼izLrj 10 ,oa 11½
JUDGMENT
Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. (Oral)
Heard Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. B.D. Kandpal, learned Counsel for respondent no.3, and, with their consent, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
2. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by the petitioner seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the case, and to quash the notification dated 29.01.2020, in so far as it related to the selection of Mr. Chandresh; and for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to grant 10% bonus marks, of the total marks obtained by the petitioner in the interview, for her experience of teaching as an Assistant Professor in a government degree college.
3. Facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the petitioner possesses the educational qualification of a Masters' Degree in Education with NET. The Uttarakhand Public Service Commission issued an advertisement on 04.08.2017 inviting applications, for appointment in different subjects, for 877 vacant posts of Assistant Professors in the Government Degree Colleges of the State of Uttarakhand. The advertisement stipulated, at Sl. No.17, that 4 posts of Assistant Professors B.Ed. (Technical Course) Hindi were also available of which 1 post was reserved for the S.C. Category.
4. The petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Caste Category. In terms of the advertisement, she applied on-line for the said post, and since she had also applied for the post of Assistant Professor (Education), she submitted another on-line application form seeking appointment to the said post also. The petitioner, having qualified in the screening test, was called for interview. She claims to have submitted her certificates, in proof of her educational qualification, her preferential qualification, reservation and experience certificate of 10 months in a Government Degree College, to the Interview Board, and contends that she is entitled for 10% bonus marks, of the total marks secured by her in the interview, towards preferential qualification. The Public Service Commission published the list of marks, secured by the selected candidates in the interview, on 29.01.2020. While the marks secured by the petitioner was shown as 59, the marks secured by Chandresh, who was selected for the post of Assistant Professor B.Ed. (Technical Course) Hindi in the S.C. Category, was recorded as 60.18 marks. The petitioner contends that failure on the part of the respondents to award her 10% bonus marks, of the total marks she secured in the interview, had deprived her of the opportunity of being selected to the post of Assistant Professor in the place of Mr. Chandresh, necessitating her having to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court.
5. Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that, since the petitioner was not well-versed in filling up the on-line form, she had, by oversight, mentioned ‘No' against the column of ‘Preferential Education Qualification'; she had, however, indicated in the said application form submitted by her on-line, that she had 10 months' experience as an Assistant Professor; in the other on-line application form submitted by her, seeking appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (Education), she had indicated that she had 10 months experience as an Assistant Professor in a government degree college; the information furnished therein ought to have been taken into consideration by the Public Service Commission in determining whether she had the requisite experience of having worked for 10 months in a government degree college; while considering her candidature, for the post of Assistant Professor B.Ed.(Hindi), the petitioner had made available a copy of the experience certificate to the Interview Board; and the action of respondent in selecting Mr. Chandresh, and in rejecting her candidature, is arbitrary and illegal, more so since Mr. Chandr
