Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arvind Kumar Jain vs M.P.Public Service Commission on 23 July, 2014
W.P.No.448/2009(S)
23.7.2014
Shri Sunil Puraiya, counsel for petitioner.
Shri K.S.Wadhwa, counsel for respondents.
The petitioner was a candidate who had appeared for selection and appointment to the post of Civil Judge in the recruitment process that was conducted for the year 2006. An advertisement was issued by the Public Service Commission on 1.5.2006, advertising 150 posts for selection. The selection was to be held in three stages. First preliminary, second final examination and third interview. The petitioner qualified in the preliminary examination and appeared in the main examination, which was conducted on 6.5.2007 and secured 63% marks in the written examination. However he appeared in the interview for which 25 marks was fixed, and it appears that he received only 8 marks. Challenging the aforesaid action, this writ petition has been filed.
The petitioner except for making allegations that the petitioner's selection has been arbitrarily rejected in the interview, no cogent evidence has been produced that there was any illegality or irregularity committed in the interview process. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for petitioner emphasized that petitioner belongs to the State of Uttar Pradesh, so he was not selected. This is a also a baseless allegation and is not supported by any cogent evidence. For appointment in the Public Service Commission under the statutory rules, a 3 member committee is constituted to take interview and the committee is headed by a sitting Judge of the High Court, a W.P.No.448/2009(S) Member of the Public Service Commission and an Expert to assist them. The committee conducts its process of interview in accordance with the law and until and unless there is any specific act of commission or omission in the selection process, merely on the basis of unspecific and vague allegation that the committee acted arbitrarily in the selection process, we see no reason to interfere in the selection process. As far as the allegation that the petitioner belongs to the State of Uttar Pradesh and only candidates of Madhya Pradesh were selected, we do not find any reason to belief the same, except taking a judicial note of the matter that various candidates from all over the country are selected in such selection process and the petitioner's allegation in this regard is without any record and material. The return filed by the respondents also shows that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the Commission. Therefore we see no reason to interfere in the matter.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
(Rajendra Menon) (Alok Verma) M Judge Judge