VIDYA SAGAR UPADHYAYA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the Court-The petitioner by this writ petition prayed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing she Chairman, U. P. Public Service Commission, Allah bad. (hereinafter referred as the UPSC in brief) not to conduct the Provincial Civil Service/Upper Subordinate Examination, 1992, scheduled to be held on 20th December, 1992, and a direction to conduct it on some other date.

(2.) THE petitioner averted that he and a large number of candidates had applied for Research Fellowship and Eligibility for Lecturership Test which is to be conducted by the University Grafts Commission (UGC, in brief) in pursuance of an advertisement dated 10./25-9-1992 published in Employment News (Weekly). It was specified in the advertisement that the test would be he'd on 20 12- 1992. It is stated that the UGC has formulated a scheme which provides that persons who want to serve as Lecturer in degree and post-graduate colleges shall have to appear in the test examination to be organised by the UGC for the Junior Research Followship and Eligibility for Lecturership. THEre is one exception As per scheme, for those persons who obtained doctorate before the end of December, 1992, for them the test examination is not necessary for appointment as lecturer in degree or post-graduate colleges Candidates who have not completed and obtained doctorate before the end of December, 1992 shall have to appear in the test for appointment for lecturership in degree and post-graduate colleges conducted by the UGC. THE petitioner claims that he is pursuing research work for the doctorate degree. THE petitioner is fully eligible and qualified for appearing in the examination scheduled to be conducted on 20th December, 1992, by the UGC in which the petitioner has been allotted roll no. and permission to appear.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri V. P. Srivatava submitted that the petitioner, is a meritorious student and expected success in either of these two examinations but he is being prevented by the UPPSC either to appear in the test to be conducted by the UGC or the Preliminary exam by the UPPSC, as he cannot appear in both the examinations which have been fixed on the same date and time, as stated above. He submitted that the act of the UPPSC is illegal and arbitrary and malafide THE petitioner and thousands of other students all over the country would suffer irreparable loss and injury on account of denial by the Chairman of the UPPSC to change the date for the preliminary examination of PCS and Upper Subordinate Services THE learned counsel for the petitioner though not pleaded or taken any ground of violation of Article 16 in the writ petition, argued that the action of the UPPSC is violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India.