BALBIR SINGH KUNDU Vs. HARYANA AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, HISSAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Haryana Agricultural University, Hissar (hereinafter referred to as the University) invited applications for one post of Admn.-cum-Accounts Officer. The advertisement appeared in the Daily Tribune dated December 21,1991. The required qualification for the post was stated as under:-

(2.) In the written statement filed, respondents No. 1 and 2 have admitted that initially seven candidates were called for interview, but "letter on all the remaining candidates were also called for interview giving general relaxation in qualification." They have further averred that a duly constituted Selection Committee had called 32 number of candidates for interview and out of these, 19 candidates appeared. On consideration of the claims of the candidates on the basis of comprehensively designed criteria, the Committee found respondent No. 3 to be more suitable for the post. Because of her (respondent No. 3) 10 years' supervisory experience as General Manager in Confed and her good performance in interview, she was selected and her case was recommended to the Vice-Chancellor for relaxation in 12 years' experience. The Vice-Chancellor approved the relaxation in experience relating to respondent No. 3 and she was appointed to the post and has since joined her duties. Respondent No. 3 on the same terms has filed her written statement.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the writ petition deserves to succeed. Admittedly, respondent No. 3 did not possess the requisite qualification, but was selected. Respondents No. 1 and 2 are not sure as to when relaxation in qualification in their case was given. As stated in para 4 of their written statement relaxation was given some time from 12.2.1992 to 14.2.1992 i.e. before the candidates had appeared for interview. On the other hand, in para 2 of preliminary objections they have stated that after respondent No. 3 appeared for interview, her case was recommended to the Vice-Chancellor for relaxation in 12 years' experience and on receipt of recommendations of the Selection Committee, the Vice-Chancellor relaxed the condition of qualification in the case of respondents No. 3. It is thus, apparent that respondent No. 1 and 2 themselves are not certain as to when qualification in the case of respondent No. 3 was relaxed. Though the petitioner has averred that qualification was relaxed because when respondent No. 3 was serving with the confed, she was taken on deputation by Ch. Bhajan Lal in Centre till the remained a Centre Minister and now due to political pressure, qualification in her case has been relaxed and she has been selected and appointed, yet this averment has remained only an allegation and cannot be accepted on the face of it, but nevertheless once respondents No. 1 and 2 decided to relax the qualification, it was incumbent upon them to re-issue the advertisement so that after relaxation, all eligible persons could apply for the post. This Court in Kuldip Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab and others, 1972 SLR 706, had held that once the qualifications have appeared in the advertisement inviting applications, those qualifications cannot be changed and the selection has to be made out of the candidates possessing these qualifications. The Division Bench of this Court in Parkash Vir and others vs. State of Haryana and others, 1992 1 SLR 157, has further held that the authorities are bound by the conditions laid down in the advertisement and no deviation therefrom is permissible. Every person who applies in response to the advertisement is entitled to say that the selecting is to be made on that basis and that basis alone. The relaxation made in that case was held to be unauthorised and not sustainable. For arriving at this conclusion, the Division Bench had relied upon the following observations of the Apex Court in The District Collector and Chairman Vizianangaram (Social Welfare Residential School Society) Viziznangram and another vs. M. Tripura Sundari Devi, 1990 4 SLR 237:-