POOJA SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus or certiorari for quashing the letter dated 20.8.2014; for acceptance of the mark sheet and provisional certificate dated 12.8.2012 and 17.8.2012 respectively, for acceptance of the mark sheet dated 6th August, 2013 issued in continuation of the previous mark sheet dated 12.8.2012; and a direction to the respondents for the issuance of an appointment letter to the petitioner for the post of Assistant Sub Inspector for which she had qualified all the necessary tests and also allow ante date seniority as well as other consequential benefits.

(2.) The grievance raised by the petitioner is that the respondent Staff Selection Commission had rejected her candidature on the ground that the final result of the petitioner in B.Com (Hons.) examination was declared on 6th August, 2013 and therefore, she did not fulfil the eligibility qualification as on 1st January 2013. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had qualified the degree course, she was issued a mark sheet bearing No.8460 dated 12th August , 2012 and a provisional certificate bearing No.09/581 by the University of Delhi (hereinafter "University") on 17th August, 2012. He further submits that the petitioner had applied to the University, seeking improvement of marks in one of the optional papers on the basis of the policy of the University, which when invoked was bound to only increase the marks, and there was no possibility of the already secured marks being decreased. Acceding to the said request, the University had increased the marks in the said optional paper and consequently, issued a fresh statement of marks dated 6th August, 2013. He also submits that the petitioner had not appeared in any further or supplementary examination, but merely an application was made for improvement of her marks in one of the optional papers, but only a mathematical enhancement of the marks was sought in terms of the policy/guidelines. However the respondent Staff Selection Commission misconstrued as if the petitioner had qualified the graduation exams later in the month of March 2013, whereas in reality the petitioner already possessed a provisional certificate of the requisite educational qualification on 17th August, 2013.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that for the recruitment the petitioner had qualified all the requisite tests which included the written examination, the PET, eligibility test and the medical examination and therefore, she was fully entitled to be appointed to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector in CISF, examination for which was held on 6.10.2013. He further submits that appointment to the petitioner had been denied on a wrong premise considering the later issuance of mark sheet by the University as if she had qualified the graduation exams later and not on the date of applying for the said post of Assistant Sub Inspector in CISF.