ANUPAMA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The process/procedure undertaken/adopted by the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission for making selection to the post of lecturer in English (School Cadre) is under challenge in this OA. The applicant who was one of the candidates interviewed by the [Commission has, therefore, sought following reliefs: "(i). That the process/procedure undertaken and adopted by the Commission for making selections to the post of Lecturer in English (School cadre) may be held illegal, invalid and of no legal consequence. The Commission may be further directed to conduct interviews by adopting a procedure in accordance with the settled law and give due weightage to higher/additional educational qualifications and restrict the percentage of marks for interview to 12.2% of the total marks. They may also be directed to give total marks. They may be directed to give weightage to the marks obtained by the applicant and other candidates in the written/screening test conducted by the commission on 14.3.98. (ii) That in case marks for oral interview have been kept more than 12.2% then the respondent Commission may be directed to proportionately reduce the awarded marks to the level of 12.2% and percentage of marks.thus rendered surplus may be suitably added to other components of selection process so that newly assigned proportions come to the equation of 100% of the total selection marks. (iii) Respondents may be directed to produce entire record pertaining to the case including. (a) The apportionment of marks under various Heads given by the Selection Committee. (b) The recommendations made by each Member of the Selection Committee and the recommendations ultimately made by the Chairman of the Selection Committee and the Public Service Commission."

(2.) The consistent stand taken by the respondents is that OA is not maintainable as the selected candidates have not been impleaded as party. The candidates who has already taken a chance in the interview and not selected cannot challenge the process of selection as no one can be allowed to approbate and reprobate. On merits it is averred that the selections were made on the basis of an overall assessment of the merit of the candidates based on their academic achievements, personality, general awareness, conceptual approach, professional knowledge etc., therefore OA, is liable to the dismissed.

(3.) We have heard Sh. DP. Gupta, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sh -D.K. Khanna, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mrs. Abhilasha Kumari, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent No.2.