MS. JASWINDER KAUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this OA, the applicant has challenged the respondents order dated 10.06.2009, cancelling her candidature for the post of Sorting Assistant of Air Mail Sorting Division in the recruitment drive of 2008 and also the letter dated 25.05.2009, directing the SSRM to take a decision in accordance with the provisions of Para 3.2 (a) of prospectus and clarification given vide Circle Office letter of even no. dated 11.08.2008 and 19.08.2008, and also the Notification dated 09.01.2002, to the extent that it provides for 'excluding vocational streams in Column 8 of its Schedule.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, who had passed 10+2 examination under Vocational Stream, applied for the post of Sorting Assistant, in response to the advertisement against the recruitment quota of vacancies in the year 2008. She participated in the written test, etc. and was declared successful in the selection process and was called for completion of pre -appointment formalities, vide letter dated 31.12.2008. During the course of verification of pre -appointment formalities, the CBSE, on a reference made by Respondent No.3 vide letter No.B -1/6/Rectt. -SA/2008 dated 27.03.2009, informed vide its letter dated 20.04.2009 that the applicant had offered Vocational Stream in 10+2 examination. Since this did not satisfy the requirements prescribed for the post in question in the Recruitment Rules, the candidature of the candidate was cancelled. This has led to the present OA being filed seeking the following reliefs: To quash the impugned letter dated 25.05.2009 and 10.06.2009 and Notification dated 09.01.2002 to the extent of the provisions of 'excluding vocational streams as contained in Column 8 of its Schedule. To direct Respondent No.1 to consider the case of the applicant in view of the various submissions made by her in her representation dated 26.10.2009, the various grounds given in this O.A and also Rule 7 of the Recruitment Rules under which the power is vested for relaxation of the relevant provision of the rules and direct for appointment of the applicant who has already been selected on merits, to the post of Sorting Assistant in Air Mail Sorting Division; To grant all consequential benefits in respect of the reliefs prayed at Sl. No.1 & 2 above in the interest of justice. To grant such other or further relief as this Tribunal deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case to meet the ends of justice and To award the costs of this application.

(3.) The following are the main grounds raised in this OA, in support of the claim of the applicant: that the applicant had submitted all the necessary documents relating to required educational qualifications, i.e., 10+2, etc. as prescribed in the prospectus along with her application form within the time fixed for submission, and these documents/certificates had been duly scrutinized by the concerned authorities and found to be correct and valid, after which she was declared successful in the process of selection as intimated by the respondents vide letter dated 31.12.2008. She had also been found medically fit. Thus issuing of the impugned order and cancellation of the candidature after completion of the whole process of selection, is unjust and also in violation of the principles of natural justice as no opportunity has been given to her before issuing the impugned letter of cancellation. That the clause 'excluding vocational stream in the Recruitment Rules of 2002 is arbitrary and contrary to the Revised Recruitment Procedure introduced vide Circular/letter dated 10.11.2004 under which the final merit list is to be prepared on the basis of different components for which the provisions have been made as under: i) 40% weightage to the marks of 10+2 or 12th Class plus ii) 50% weightage to the marks secured in aptitude test, plus iii) 5 marks for knowledge of typing on Computer iv) 5 marks for date entry in Computer. and according to this weightage the applicant had secured 87.8 marks out of 100 attaining the 1st position. That cancellation of the candidature in spite of the fact that she had passed the written examination, aptitude test and the computer test and typing test, and had secured first position, and appointment of candidates who have secured lower rank, is discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. That the CBSE while introducing vocational education in schools had mentioned that these courses aim at (i) linking education with productivity & (ii) providing the students with essential occupational background and technical knowledge along with the related elements general education. Thus possessing of some technical knowledge cannot be treated as a disqualification for appointment to the posts of Postal & Sorting Assistants in the Postal Department as the technical knowledge possessed by the applicant would be an asset to the Department instead if treating the same as liability or a disqualification.