DINKAR MINZ Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition relates to appointment of Director for the Ranchi Institute of Neuro Psychiatric and Allied Sciences Ranchi (RINPAS). It was therefore, heard along with WP (PIL) 58 of 2004. But since on hearing the matter in detail, we felt that the public interest litigation should be disposed off separately after a local inspection, we have rendered a separate judgment therein on 21.5.2004. A separate judgment is being rendered in this writ petition on the question projected in this writ petition.

(2.) THE writ petitioner was an applicant for the post of Director of RINPAS based on Annexure 4 advertisement. The advertisement inviting applications provided that the applicant must be having thorough understanding and wide experience in the field of Psychiatry and the related areas. He should also posses strong administrative capability. He must possess a recognized Post Graduate medical qualification and other academic qualifications from a recognized institution and must have a minimum teaching experience of ten years as Professor/Associate Professor in a department. Preference was to be given to those who had been Heads of the Departments. An ideal candidate was to be in the age group of 45 to 50 years as on 30.6.2003. However, for a especially qualified and experienced candidate, the age limit was liable to be relaxed.

(3.) THE case of the writ petitioner is that no communication was sent to him about the interview, fixed on 6.11.2003 and consequently he was deprived of an opportunity to appear at the interview. The second contention was that respondent No. 5 had not fulfilled the qualifications prescribed in Annexure -4 notification, since respondent No. 5 did not have the teaching experience as Professor/Associate Professor or a Reader in a Medical College. The State and RINPAS met this plea by submitting that the petitioner and Dr. Khess were informed of the interview by the letter sent on 16.10.2003 and the petitioner failed to appear at the interview. The State cannot be faulted for proceeding with the selection and the appointment of respondent No. 5 especially since Dr. Khess also did not respond to the notice inviting him to attend the interview. In view of this controversy, we directed the State to make available to us the relevant files. Pursuant to or direction, the relevant files were produced. One of them purports to be an Issue Register and it indicates that letters to the petitioner, Dr. Khess, respondent No. 5 and one Dr. Tushar Kanti Ganguly were dispatched in relation to the selection to the post of Director of RINPAS. But the Register does not show how the communication was sent, whether through post or otherwise, and to that extent, it is equivocal. The other file produced shows the proceeding of the selection committee held on 6.7.2003 in the official chamber of the Secretary, Health and Medical Education and Family Welfare, Jharkhand. It shows that six candidates had applied for the post of Director. The screening committee had short listed and found three candidates fit to be called for interview, namely the writ petitioner, Dr. Khess and Dr. P.K. Chakraborty, respondent No. 5. The proceeding shows that according to this list, notices were issued to Dr. D. Minj, Dr. Khess and Dr. P.K. Chakraborty to appear for the interview on 6.11.2003. It further records that only Dr. P.K. Chakraborty reported for the interview. The Selection Committee waited for a reasonable time for the other candidates to come and report for the interview, but no other candidate reported for interview. It further shows that Dr. Chakraborty was interviewed and even thereafter, the interview committee waited for some more time for the other two to appear and still they did not report. The committee ultimately adjudged respondent No. 5 fit for the post of Director, RINPAS in view of what it called his excellent professional record and vast experience. The committee also recommended relaxation of age to respondent No. 5 and recommended that he be continued until he attained the age of 65 years.