J KRISHNAKUMAR Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MADRAS BENCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the requisition given by the Government of Pondicherry for filling up the two unreserved posts of Joint Director/Deputy Director (Agriculture) in the Agriculture Department of Government of Pondicherry through direct recruitment, the Union Public Service Commission (in short UPSC) issued a public notification dated 23-5-1998 inviting applications from the eligible candidates. The notification prescribed the essential qualifications, viz. EQ(A):M.Sc. Degree in Agriculture from a recognised University or equivalent and EQ(B):Three years'/Two years' experience in Extension Work/Soil/Input Analysis.

(2.) IN response to the said notification, Agriculture Officers working in the Agriculture Department of the Government of Pondicherry, submitted their applications for the post of Joint/Deputy Director (Agriculture) and were expecting the call letters for the interview. On coming to know that some of their junior colleagues have received the call letter for the interview scheduled on 13-10-1997 and that their applications were rejected by the UPSC in the process of shortlisting of the candidates to be called for the interview for the post of Deputy Director (Agriculture), they approached the Tribunal by filing O.A. No.1045 of 1997, seeking the relief to direct the UPSC to include their names for the interview, to interview them and to prepare the select list on the basis of such interview. They also sought for the interim relief directing the UPSC not to publish the results of the interview and not to make any appointments on the basis of the above interview.

(3.) IN both the above said original applications, UPSC filed reply statement. IN their reply statements, UPSC has justified the shortlisting of the candidates to be called for the interview by stating that since the applications received were numerous, the shortlisting of the candidates to be called for the interview became inevitable and, therefore, it was decided that the essential qualification under EQ(B), i.e. three years/two years' experience in extension work/soil/input analysis was to be counted after the candidate has acquired the qualification under EQ(A), i.e., M.Sc. Degree in Agriculture. Since all the original applicants did not fulfil the essential qualification under EQ(B), they were not called for the interview. It was further submitted that in case of the original applicant in O.A. No.388 of 1999 though the applicant was categorised as lacking the essential qualification under EQ(B), in compliance of the interim order dated 18-5-1999 passed by the Tribunal, he was interviewed on 27-5-1999, but the result of the interview was not published.