ASHOK NARAYAN KALE Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who was a candidate for one of the 34 posts of Civil Judge class II reserved for Scheduled Tribes has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging his non-selection for the post of Civil Judge, class II reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidates. '

(2.) THE relevant facts briefly are that the Madhya Pradesh Public service Commission (for the 'm. P. P. S. C. ') issued an advertisement for the recruitment of Civil Judges, Class II on 30-8-2001. The advertisement was corrected by a subsequent advertisement dated 24-10-2001 of the M. P. P. S. C. Under the corrected advertisement, out of the total posts of 190,34 posts were reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidates. Pursuant to the advertisement, the petitioner applied and thereafter appeared in the written examination with Roll no. 204970 and, on the basis of results of the written examination declared on 24-11-2002, was called for interview. After the interview, the M. P. P. S. C. selected only six candidates for the 34 posts reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidates for appointment to the posts of Civil Judge, Class II. No recommendation was made by the M. P. P. S. C. for appointment to the remaining 28 posts reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidates. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a direction to the M. P. P. S. C. to submit the recommendation for the remaining 28 posts for Scheduled Tribes candidates and, in particular, for a direction to the m. P. P. S. C. to recommend the petitioner for appointment on one of the posts reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidates.

(3.) MR. Pankaj Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that in the advertisements issued by the M. P. P. S. C. there was no mention that candidates for the posts reserved for Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes must secure a minimum of 35% marks in the aggregate (written plus interview)for being selected on the post of Civil Judge, Class II, and yet the petitioner has not been selected only because he has not secured a minimum of 35% marks in the aggregate (written plus interview) in the selection conducted by the m. P. P. S. C. He cited the decision in Umesh Chandra Shukla Vs. Union of India and others, (1985) 3 SCC 721, in which the Supreme Court has taken a view that the Selection Committee could not prescribe a minimum of 600 marks in aggregate as an additional requirement which the Committee has to satisfy for being selected when the Recruitment Rules did not prescribe such requirement. He also cited the decision of the Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Sharma and another Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, AIR 2008 SC 1657, in which the supreme Court has taken a view that once an advertisement is issued fixing a selection criteria, the selection criteria cannot be altered subsequently. Mr. Dubey finally submitted that the M. P. P. S. C. in its return has taken a stand before the Court that after the result of the main examination of recruitment, the High Court prescribed the minimum qualifying marks for the Civil Judge, class II, as 35% marks for Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes candidates. He submitted that when the Proviso to sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Madhya pradesh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 is clear that the procedure and curriculum for holding examination for the selection of candidates shall be prescribed by the Public Service Commission in consultation with the High Court and the State Government, the High Court could not have prescribed the minimum of 35% marks in the aggregate (written plus interview) for selection of a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribes and scheduled Castes community.