LAWS(ALL)-1997-5-125

NEETA TEWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On May 02, 1997
NEETA TEWARI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Phaujdar, J. The present writ petition has been filed by two petitioners Km. Neeta Tewari and Km. Bharti Pandey challenged on order of the U. P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission, Gomti Nagar Lucknow, (respondent No. 2) refus ing to call these two petitioners for an inter view towards selection of candidates for ap pointment as lecturers in Sanskrit. These two ladies have Qualifications of M. A. in Sanskrit with B. ED and Ph. D. with ex perience of four years of teaching. They had obtained 71. 1% and 69% marks respective ly in M. A. examination.

(2.) AN advertisement was published by the U. P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission (in short Commission) for ap pointment of lecturers in different subjects including Sanskrit. A copy of this advertise ment is in ANnexure No. 2a to the writ petition. The essential Qualification as indi cated in the advertisement was post graduate degree in the subject from any recognised University and the preferential qualification was L. T. Diploma from any Government or recognised institute or a Bachelor of Education degree from any recognised University. Page 2 of the adver tisement gave certain important directions under direction 7, it was stated that the essential qualification indicated in the ad vertisement was the minimum and a candid ate could not claim an interview simply for having this minimum qualification. If the commission was not in position to call each and every applicant for interview, then the Commission may keep in considerating the academic records, the percentage of marks as a basis for interview. The general rule was to call four candidates against one available vacancy. Admittedly in the general category there were 13 vacancies for the post of Lec turer in Sanskrit and it is not disputed that S3 candidates were called for interview,

(3.) THE petitioners submitted a sup plementary affidavit to bring on record the guide lines for the working of the Commis sion. THEse guide lines are contained in Annexure No. 1 to the supplementary affidavit. THE petitioners also indicated, through this supplementary affidavit, the marks ob tained by the other candidates called for interview who were selected by the Commis sion. This Annexure No. 2 gives the details of the percentage of the marks obtained by these candidates in examinations from the High School stage to the Post-Graduate stage, which also indicated if they did or did not posses L. T. or B. Ed, degree and Ph. D Degree and teaching experience.