Jangranjodh Singh vs State of Punjab and Others

Augustine George Masih, J.—Petitioner has approached this Court impugning the selection and appointment of respondent No. 4-Rachhpal Singh on the post of District Commander. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the respondents, petitioner applied for the reserved post of Scheduled Caste (Others) out of the two posts reserved for the scheduled caste, one was reserved'' for Balmiki/Mazbi Sikh of Punjab, if available and one post of others in scheduled caste category. Since the petitioner and respondent No. 4 belong to the same category of scheduled caste (others) and there was one post, which was left out of the reserved two posts for this category, as per the general practice adopted by the Punjab Public Service Commission three times the number of vacancies were to be called from the shortlisted candidates for interview and for the main examination. Petitioner being at Sr. No. 03 of the merit list short-listing was eligible to be called for the post and was rightly called. However, respondent No. 4 was at Sr. No. 4 and, therefore, could not have been called for interview. Consideration of respondent No. 4, thus, is not sustainable what to say of the appointment given to him after selection. It has further been contended that the petitioner has secured higher marks even as per the criteria as has been laid down by the Punjab Public Service Commission in the academic qualification and others whereas in the viva-voce, petitioner has been given lower marks than respondent No. 4, because of which, he has effectively marched over the petitioner and obtained higher marks in the grand total resulting in his selection. This, the counsel for the petitioner contends, selection of respondent No. 4 is not sustainable.

I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the records of the case.

The contention of the counsel for the petitioner that as per the advertisement, there were two posts reserved for the scheduled caste, out of which one was reserved for the Balmiki/Mazbi Sikh of Punjab, although can, at the first instance, be accepted but there is a rider attached thereto, which indicates that this reservation of one post would be applicable, in case a candidate under the Balmiki/Mazbi Sikh of Punjab category is available. In the pleadings, there is not an assertion to this effect that such a candidate was available for shortlisting after the screening test.

If that be the position and even if the contention of the petitioner that the general rule of calling three times the number of posts reserved for a particular category for interview is accepted, six candidates coming to the scheduled caste category were required to be called for interview. Respondent being at Sr. No. 04 in the merit list has rightly been called for interview. In any case, there is no such restriction as to the number of candidates with regard to the number of posts as the important note attached to the advertisement, which would deal with this aspect reads as follows:-

(f) Prescribed Essential Qualifications are minimum and mere possession of the same does not entitle candidates to be called for interview. Where the number of applications received in response to the advertisement is large and if it will not be convenient or possible for the Commission to interview all the candidates, the Commission may restrict the number of candidates for interview to a reasonable limit on the basis of short listing them by order of their academic merit as per their qualification/higher marks OR by holding a screening test.

A perusal of the above indicates that it was the discretion of the Punjab Public Service Commission to call for interview the shortlisted candidates dependent upon the convenience and possibility of the Commission to interview the candidates. The assertion of the counsel for the petitioner, therefore, on this ground also cannot be accepted as there was no mandate that candidates only three times the number of vacancies were to be called for, for a particular category for interview.

The criteria, as laid down by the Punjab Public Service Commission, clearly spells out the break-up of marks, which were to be assigned for the academic and other achievements and for the viva-voce, according to which, 50% marks for the viva-voce and the remaining marks for different heads were provided. Details thereof read as follows:-

Academic Qualification (Basic) 42

Maximum Marks-42) Each candidate will get marks according to his/her marks obtained in basic qualification degree

Higher Qualification 2

Higher Qualification in the relevant field over & above the basic qualification/LLB/MBA

NSS 2

Minimum three (03) campus of 10 days each

Sports

(a) Gold/Silver/Bronzer Medalist 4

4 in the Olympic/Common Wealth/World Tournaments

(b) Gold/Silver Medalists in Asian Games 3

(c) Gold/Silver Medalists in 2 National Games Championship Note:

(i) In order to be eligible for the above marks the candidate will produce Gradation Certificate issued by the Director (Sports), Govt. of Punjab.

(ii) The guidelines for Sports Gradation Policy of the Government of Punjab are attached.

(iii) Credit only for one best achievement will be given.

5 Viva-Voce 50

(there will be equal division of marks between all the panelists) Total 100

In the light of the above, even if the petitioner had secured higher marks in the academic and other achievements but that would not be a determinative factor with regard to the final result as the marks of the interview and viva-voce were to be added to make up the total of the secured marks of the candidates. That being lower in the case of the petitioner than respondent No. 4, the contention of the counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. The writ petition being devoid of merit, therefore, stands dismissed.