Neetu Palariya vs Uttarakhand Public Service Commission

Vipin Sanghi, CJ

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking to declare her disqualification on 21.06.2021, by the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “Commission”), as void. She further seeks a mandamus to the respondent to consider her candidature in the EWS category, and require the respondent to issue her admit card to appear in the mains examination in the Uttarakhand Judicial Service Civil Judge (Junior Division) Examination, 2021, which is scheduled to be held from 02.08.2022 to 05.08.2022, by treating her candidature as valid for the said examination.

The petitioner responded to the advertisement issued by the respondent-Commission, inviting applications for participation in the said examination. She was declared as qualified in the preliminary examination on 19.04.2022. The respondent issued another advertisement on 26.04.2022, calling upon the qualified candidates in the preliminary examination, to submit their on-line applications along with the requisite documents. The petitioner submitted her application form for the mains examination. She claims to be belonging to the EWS category. After scrutinizing the applications received, the name of the petitioner was put in the rejection list which was published on 21.06.2022. The reason for rejection stated by the respondent, was that the EWS certificate, submitted by her, related to the financial year 2022-23, whereas, in terms of the advertisement, she was required to submit her EWS certificate relatable to the year 2021-22. The respondent granted time till 12.07.2022 to all the candidates whose names appeared in the rejection list to make amends. Admittedly, the petitioner did not respond to the said public notice. She did not make amends by 12.07.2022. Only on 21.07.2022, she sent an e-mail, enclosing therewith another EWS certificate relatable to the year 2021-22.

Mr. N.S. Pundir, learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advanced notice, states that the petitioner’s request for acceptance of her EWS certificate for the year 2021-22 has been rejected on 29.07.2022 on the ground that the same had not been submitted by 12.07.2022.

The petitioner submits that she has not been communicated the said rejection. In the aforesaid background, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

As noticed hereinabove, the mains examination is scheduled to be held from 02.08.2022 to 05.08.2022, i.e. from tomorrow onwards.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also sought to place reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court, in the case of “Ram Kumar Gijroya vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & another, (2016) 4 SCC 754”.

This case related to the aspect of non-submission of the OBC certificate after the last date mentioned in the advertisement. The issue was whether such candidates could be considered as eligible for selection under the OBC category, or not?

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record.

The petitioner, in our view, has been very laid-back in her attitude. She did not make up the deficiencies, despite being put to notice of the deficiencies in her application form on 21.06.2022, which gave sufficient time to her to remedy the defects by 12.07.2022. She sent an e-mail with correct EWS certificate only on 21.07.2022. Even, thereafter, she did not approach the Court, and kept waiting till the last moment.

According to the petitioner, the rejection of her representation for late acceptance of her EWS certificate for the year 2021-22, on 29.07.2022 was not communicated to her. Thus, the petitioner should have approached the Court early. By approaching now and seeking an order that she be permitted to participate in the mains examination, which is to start tomorrow, the petitioner is denying the respondent the opportunity to put up their defence, and also cause disruption in the process of holding the examination. In a public examination of this kind, a lot of preparation is required to be made. The number of question papers to be printed, sitting arrangement at the examination centres, the answer books to be arranged etc. All have to be planned well in advance. If such petitions were to be entertained at the very last moment, it would, completely, derail the examination process, and other candidates would keep springing up with such like petitions even till a few hours before the examination.

For the aforesaid reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. The writ petition is, hereby, dismissed.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.