GURDIP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment of mine will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 4735 and 4825 of 1988 as common questions of law and fact are involved in both writ petitions. The facts, however, are being taken from CWP No. 4735 of 1988.

(2.) Respondent No. 2 Punjab Public Service Commission, Patiala, through advertisement No. 4 published in the Indian Express of 29th August, 1987 (Copy Annexure P-1) invited applications from the eligible candidates for a competitive examination in order to recruit 59 posts in the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) and its Allied Services. Apropos the said advertisement, the petitioner duly applied to compete the said examination. He appeared in the PCS (Executive) Examination held in December, 1987 and cleared the same. The petitioner was issued an interview letter requiring him to appear in the office of the Punjab Public Service Commission, Patiala at 8.30 a.m. on 20th May, 1988 for viva voce test. However, the petitioner was not interviewed. It is averred in the petition that the action of the respondents is not interviewing the petitioner is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, therefore, has sought issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to interview and consider him for appointment to the PCS (Executive) and its Allied Services.

(3.) In the written statement filed by respondent No. 2, it was submitted that according to advertisement (Copy Annexure P-1), there was no post reserved for the children and grand children of freedom fighters. But inadvertently due to clerical mistake, the petitioner was called for viva voce test considering him to be a candidate of reserved category.