The Supreme Court has recently observed that no candidate can be allowed to alter Personal Details once the selection process begins, appropriate details should be provided prior to it.
The Bench comprising of Justice DY Chadrachud and Justice AS Bopana was dealing with an appeal by Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission via which it has assailed the High Court wherein the appeal to quash the impugned order by Lower Court has been rejected.
The Lower Court in the said impugned order has allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents, which included the appellant herein to consider the case of Respondent for appointment on the post of the Chief Municipal Officer GradeKh, Assistant Director or any other post mentioned by him in his preference letter.
Brief Facts of the Case
The Respondent applied for the job and provided all the details as per criteria including personal details. The educational qualification and other criteria were the same for all the posts advertised except the age limit being different as specified. That apart, for the posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Assistant Jail Superintendent and Deputy Transport Inspector, specific Physical Measurement was indicated as the minimum eligibility criteria. Therefore, the candidates satisfying the eligibility criteria could choose their order of preference to the various posts that were advertised.
The Respondent submitted his application and had shown his order of preference. The second preference shown was for the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, which could have been opted by a candidate if the candidate satisfied the minimum required physical measurement. Pursuant to such applications, the preliminary examination and the written examination was conducted. The respondent who had applied under the Scheduled Caste category had secured 892 marks out of 1575 marks. The marks obtained by the Respondent was not sufficient in the order of merit to be selected for the post as per his first preference, namely Deputy District Collector. However, the marks secured was sufficient to be placed in the merit list for the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police. Accordingly, he was included in the main list for the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police by the appellant. In compliance with the remaining formalities for appointment the Respondent appeared before the Medical Board when it was found that his height was only 162 cms. as against the prescribed minimum height of 168 cms. He was therefore not eligible to be appointed to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
As per the appointment made to the other posts it was revealed that a schedule caste candidate who had secured 892 marks was appointed to the post of CMO. The Respondent having shown his subsequent preference for CMO in his application form claimed before the Court that in such event he having obtained 892 marks was entitled to be appointed in the post of CMO. The learned Single Judge having accepted such contention had allowed the writ petition and directed consideration. The learned Division Bench of High Court approved the same. It is in that circumstance the appellant, which is the authority saddled with the responsibility of undertaking the selection process is before this Court in this appeal.
High Court Observation
The Court noted that when such is the process of selection, if the Respondent who had made declaration about the correctness of his eligibility an secured the selection to be placed in the main list for the said post, he has to blame himself if found ineligible since his height was admittedly 162 cms. which was in fact within his knowledge.
"He ought not to have exercised the preference. But having acted so at that stage, if he seeks appointment to the next preferred post and such request is accepted, it will result in displacing a candidate who having made a truthful declaration had indicated the appropriate preference, who is selected and placed in the main list. Therefore, in such circumstance, if any interference is made in the process of selection, apart from the fact that it could interfere with the administrative process would also cause hardship to the candidates who have already been appointed and are not before this Court."
The Court further observed that the Rule concerned provides for a definite process, which was also depicted in the advertisement calling for applications and the candidate concerned had applied without demur and also furnished a declaration with regard to correctness of details provided. He thus cannot thereafter turn around to seek alteration of the position to the detriment of others.
The Learned Counsel of the Respondent relied on SC Rulings in R. L. Arora Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors, 1964 Latest Caselaw 34 SC, Union of India & Ors Vs. Major General Madan Lal Yadav, 1996 Latest Caselaw 289 SC which the Court rejected.
Read Judgement Here:
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments