Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sandeep Kumar vs Haryana Staff Selection Commission on 23 May, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
C.W.P. No.8542 OF 2012 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
*****
C.W.P. No.8542 OF 2012
DATE OF DECISION : 23.05.2012
Sandeep Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
Haryana Staff Selection Commission ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Present : Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)
Petitioner has approached this Court asserting that the cut-off marks for short-listing the candidates to be called for interview for the post of Assistant Lineman in Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'UHBVN') as 73% is arbitrary and without any nexus with the objects sought to be achieved.
Counsel for the petitioner contends that no justification for fixation of such percentage of marks has been given in the notification, which has been issued by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') dated 12.04.2012 (Annexure P-5). His further contention is that even if short-listing has to be resorted to, they should be disclosed the number of candidates which they are calling depending upon the post available which has not been done. Petitioner has obtained 72.57% marks in the I.T.I. Diploma which when rounded up comes to 73% therefore, the petitioner should have found his name in the shortlist and entitled to participate in the interview. He, on this basis, contends that the notice dated 12.04.2012 deserves to be quashed.
I have heard counsel for the petitioner and gone through the records of the case.
C.W.P. No.8542 OF 2012 -2-
As is apparent from the advertisement and admitted by the petitioner that specific clause has been inserted in the advertisement itself that the Commission can resort to short-listing of candidates, in case it so decided and on the basis of the criteria it may fix. Therefore, the Commission in exercise of that powers has resorted to process of short-listing the candidates for interview and in its wisdom has fixed 73% as cut-off marks for calling the candidates for participation in the interview. This as asserted by the petitioner is arbitrary. While asserting so, no material has been placed on record which would substantiate this contention of the petitioner. An argument has also been raised that the Commission should have specified that the candidates from 73% marks onwards would fulfill the requirement of three times the number of seats available for interview which is missing in the notice. This assertion cannot be accepted and had the petitioner wanted such an assertion to be taken note of, material should have been placed on record in support of this contention.
The next contention which has been raised is that the petitioner has obtained 72.57% marks in the diploma which should have been rounded up making him eligible with 73% to participate in the interview. This contention also cannot be accepted for the reason that there is no provision under the instructions or the rules which provide for such a process to be resorted to by the Commission. In the absence of any statutory provision/instructions the process of rounding up as has been pressed into force by the petitioner cannot be said to be permissible. Since the petitioner does not fulfill the requirement of cut-off marks as 73%, he has rightly not been called for interview.
In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the present petitioner, the same stands dismissed.
23.05.2012 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)
C.W.P. No.8542 OF 2012 -3-
adhikari JUDGE