MAHESH PRASAD SHARMA Vs. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PALOK Basu, J. Dr. Mahesh Prasad Sharma has filed this writ petition with the prayer that the respondents, i. e. , Public Service Commission, U. P. , Allahabad and the State of Uttar Pradesh through its concerned department should be directed through a suitable writ in the nature of mandamus to adjudge the suitability of the petitioner through interview and after recom mending his name, he should be appointed to the post of Assistant Director (Biology) in the Biology Section of Forensic Science Laboratory, U. P.

(2.) SRI Yar Mohd. learned counsel for the petitioner was heard at length in support of this writ petition. When this writ petition was filed a Division Bench of this Court by its interim order dated 15-9-1993 permitted the Stand ing Counsel to file a counter affidavit but in the meantime directed the peti tioner to be allowed to appear in the interview but the result was not to be declared until further orders. SRI V. M. Sahai, learned counsel for the U. P. Public Service Commission has filed a counter affidavit along with application that ex pane order dated 15-9-1993 should be vacated. When this matter was listed for further orders and admission, the Court felt the need to go into question as to whether all other candidates who were interviewed had possessed the preferential qualification which was advertised for selecting the candidates to the aforesaid post. The entire record has been produced by SRI V. M. Sahai, learned counsel for the U. P. , Public Service Commission. In the counter affidavit it has been stated that a method was found out by the U. P. Public Service Commission for short-listing the candidates to be interviewed for the purpose of filling up the vacancies. The exact averments may be usefully repro duced for ready reference :- "that the contents of para-7 of the writ petition as stated are not correct and in reply it is submitted that Commission has fixed criteria for calling candidates for interview. It was decided that the aggregate of M. Sc. and experience of each year was given 5 marks and as the petitioner claimed 10 years experience therefore he was awarded 50 marks which was added in the total percentage gained by the petitioner in the M. Sc. which was 60. 3 and sum was 110. 3 of which average comes to about 55-65 and as such only those candidates were called for interview whose average was more than 57% and in this view of the matter peti tioner was rightly not called for interview. A photo copy of extract of criteria fixed by the Commission is being annexed here with as Annexure-CA 2 to this counter affidavit. " 3. It is settled law that as between the equal candidates, i. e. , candidates who possessed minimum as well as preferential qualification identical to other, it is open to the Public Service Commission to short-list the candidates on the basis of the marks in the essential qualifications which each candidate has obtained therein. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission v. N. K. Poddar, 1994 Vol. VI, J. T. , p. 302 that short-listing can be done even on the basis of larger number of years of practice as an Advocate than the minimum number of years prescribed in the advertisement. Consequently, it follows that where all the candidates called to be interviewed possessed similar qualification short-listing could have been done on the basis of the marks obtained in the essential qualification. 4. From the record produced by SRI Sahai, it is apparent that all the candidates called for interview possessed minimum qualification as well as preferential qualification as advertised and, therefore, the method chosen by the Public Service Commission for short-listing the candidates is perfectly justified. Consequently, the petitioner can have no grievance for the fact that he stood short-listed on account of lesser marks in the M. Sc. Examination. 5. In view of what has been stated above, this writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. The interim order dated 15-9-1993 is vacated. Petition dismissed. .