BAL KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners Sri Bhupesh Kandpal, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand Sri N.P. Sah, learned counsel for the Public Service Commission Sri B.D. Kandpal and the learned counsel for the interveners Sri R.S. Bisht.

(2.) THE petitioners by means of the present writ petition have challenged the selection process by the State Public Service Commission, Uttarakhand (from hereinafter referred to as the Commission) and its subsequent implementation to the posts of Junior Engineers (Civil) in Public Works Department, State of Uttarakhand (from hereinafter referred to as PWD). The principal contention of the petitioners is that in its advertisement dated 7th February, 2007 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition), inter alia, the Commission had invited applications from eligible candidates for 70 posts of Junior Engineer (Civil) in PWD, State of Uttarakhand. The last date of submitting the applications for the said posts was 27th February, 2007. Subsequently, the petitioners were told that though advertisement was made for only 70 vacancies, the Commission, all the same, has selected 258 candidates for the posts of Junior Engineer (Civil). The petitioners allege that this is in clear violation of the advertisement and the conditions laid down therein inasmuch as once 70 vacancies have been notified, selection could be made against only 70 vacancies and any selection made over and above the notified vacancies is per se illegal.

(3.) LEARNED counsel representing the respondents have also pointed out the condition of the advertisement, namely, condition no. 4, which states that in an extraordinary situation the posts could be increased or decreased.