NAGESH CHANDRA KESHARWANI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners, in this bunch of writ petitions, are aggrieved by their non-selection for appointment to the post of Assistant Statistical Officer as they have failed to secure minimum marks in the interview. The jurisdiction of Public Service Commission to fix minimum marks for qualifying interview is primarily questioned in all the writ petitions. All the petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. Writ Petition No.14179 of 2019 (Nagesh Chandra Kesharwani and 26 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 11 Others) is taken as the lead case.

(2.) Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as ''the Commission') issued advertisement No.4 of 2014-15 dated 17th March, 2015 initiating recruitment to large number of vacancies occurring in different departments of the State of Uttar Pradesh. Controversy in this bunch of petitions, however, is confined to 373 posts of Assistant Statistical Officer (general recruitment) in Economic and Statistic Division, State Planning Institution U.P. A total number of 7291 applications were received by the Commission against 373 advertised posts of Assistant Statistical Officer. The recruitment exercise consisted of a screening test followed by interview. 1261 candidates could qualify screening test and were accordingly called for interview. Out of those 1261 candidates only 1133 candidates could submit their educational and other eligibility documents to the Commission. A committee was constituted to examine eligibility of candidates who had cleared screening test. The committee found that only 340 candidates were eligible for being called to face interview. 302 candidates out of those 340 actually appeared to face interview.

(3.) The determination of eligibility by the Committee constituted for the purpose came to be questioned before this Court in Writ Petition No.13091 of 2019 (Shrawan Kumar And 5 Others Vs. Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission). This Court while dismissing the writ petitions vide judgment dated 21.8.2019 clarified that eligibility of the candidate would have to be restricted to the recruitment rules and the advertisement. The Commission also undertook to scrupulously comply with the provisions of the applicable rules and the advertisement while determining eligibility of candidates. Para 13 and 14 of the judgment in Shrawan Kumar (supra) is relevant and is reproduced hereinafter:-