ANGUTO SOPHIE Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Nagaland Public Service Commission ("NPSC" in short) made an advertisement dated 19-10-2016 by which several posts were advertised including five posts of Assistant Public Prosecutor (Class-1 Gazetted) under the Department of Justice & Law. The petitioner being a graduate in LLB and having the educational qualification prescribed in the advertisement applied for the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor ("APP" in short). The petitioner was allowed to sit in the written examination and ' he was declared successful by Notification, dated 28-06-2017. Call letter was also issued to the petitioner for interview to the Viva-voce which was scheduled to be held on 28-07-2017 at 9:00 a.m. The petitioner accordingly appeared before the interview board but as he could not submit his HSSLC pass certificate, his candidature was rejected. Thereafter, the NPSC issued a Notification dated 02-08-2017 rejecting the candidature of three applicants for various reasons. In the said Notification, the name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No. 1 and the reason for rejection of his candidate was due to failure to produce HSSLC pass certificate. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition.

(2.) Heard Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Inaholi, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents as well as Mr. C.T. Jamir, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Yalemsen, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3/NPSC.

(3.) Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner passed his Pre-University Examination in the year 2007 from the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Pune. Thereafter, the petitioner completed his five years course LLB in the year 2013 from Pune University. Immediately, the petitioner enrolled himself with the Bar Council of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh & Sikkim. To that effect, a certificate bearing Roll No.1159 of 2013 was issued to the petitioner. As the advertisement dated 19-10-2016 prescribes the eligibility educational qualification should be graduate in any discipline with LLB and registered as member of any bar council and the petitioner having satisfied the said educational qualification had applied through online against the post of APP advertised in the advertisement dated 19-10-2016. The petitioner was allowed to site for the written examination wherein, he was successful and thereafter, he was called for the interview to be held on 28-07-201 7. In terms of the call letter, the petitioner appeared before the interview however, his case was not taken up inasmuch as, he did not have the pass certificate of HSSLC. Thereafter, the candidature of the petitioner was rejected by Notification dated 02-08-2017. It is submitted that passing of LLB degree would indicate that the petitioner had already passed his Pre-University Examination and further enrollment in the Bar Council would also indicate that the petitioner has been successful in all the past examination faced by him. Therefore, merely, due to the failure on the part of the petitioner to produce the pass certificate in respect of HSSLC, the interview board could not have rejected the case of the petitioner summarily. Relying on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union Public Service Commission v. Gyan Prakash Srivastava, 2012 Supp AIR(SC) 621 learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that since the respondent therein had attached with his application, the certificate issued by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh which must have been issued keeping in view the fact that he possessed degree in law awarded by a university recognized by the Bar Council of India for the purpose of the Act and the certificates issued by different departments of the Central Government showing his employment on different posts, the commission was not at all justified in refusing to entertain his application for the post of legal Advisor. He contends that the present case is similarly situated with the case of Gyan Prakash Srivastava . In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Notification dated 02-08-2017 be set aside and quashed and the NPSC may be directed to hold an interview board for considering the case of the petitioner.