Jharkhand High Court
Pankaj Kumar Pandey @ Pankaj Pandey & ... vs The State Of Jharkhand & Others on 28 January, 2019
Author: Aniruddha Bose
Bench: Chief Justice, Anubha Rawat Choudhary
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A. No. 399 of 2018
----
Pankaj Kumar Pandey @ Pankaj Pandey & Another... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Others ... ... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
----
For the Appellants : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Kumar Vaibhav, Advocate
For the Respondent State : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate General
For the Respondent JPSC : Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, Advocate
For the Intervener : Mr. Shubhashis Rasik Soren, Advocate
----
th
Order No. 12 : Dated 28 January, 2019
Aniruddha Bose, C.J.
In this appeal, the appellants in substance question the legality of mains examination conducted by Jharkhand Public Service Commission for entry into various administrative posts in the State of Jharkhand after they were unsuccessful on this count before the learned First Court. This examination is termed as "Combined Civil Services Examination". There are three phases through which the examination is to be held being preliminary, mains and oral interview. The two appellants, who were successful candidates in the preliminary examination, have questioned the action of the authorities in increasing the number of candidates for the mains examination. According to them, only 5138 candidates were successful in the preliminary examination to qualify for the mains. Thereafter, on the basis of two notifications, the list of successful candidates in the preliminary examination have been enlarged and in the mains examination which has commenced today itself, altogether 34,634 candidates are being allowed to sit. The writ petition of the two appellants was dismissed by the learned First Court mainly on the ground that the appellants, being the writ petitioners before the learned First Court, were not aggrieved by such action. -2-
Mr. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, however, has argued that in the event there is deviation from the rules prescribed for the examination midway, then such deviation from the rules itself gives rise to cause of action which was capable of being legally assailed by a candidate.
Learned Advocate General has appeared on behalf of the State and Mr. Piprawall has appeared on behalf of the J.P.S.C. At this stage, common submission of these two authorities follows the line of reasoning on which the learned First Court has dismissed the writ petition. Both of them have also argued that since none of the candidates who has got a chance to sit in the mains examination has been impleaded as respondent in the writ petition and hence in the appeal also, the proceeding ought to fail for non-joinder of necessary parties.
Mr. Mazumdar cited certain decisions on the question of locus and vested legal right of the candidates to require the examining authority to stick to the rules prescribed. In our opinion, however, as this appeal would determine the right of a large number of candidates who have been allowed to sit in the mains examination and whose right to sit in the mains examination is questioned by Mr. Mazumdar's client, they or at least some representatives from that category of examinees ought to have had been made parties. Mr. Mazumdar has made oral prayer for right to sue in representative capacity in the manner contemplated in Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure in such circumstances.
On the basis of such oral submission, we permit the appellants to sue in representative capacity as there are numerous persons having interest in the present appeal. Let notice of the institution of this appeal be published in the English daily Times of India in all the editions published from the State of -3- Jharkhand and Hindi daily Prabhat Khabar. The Registry shall settle the format of the notice by 30th January, 2019 and the publication to be made immediately thereafter. The same notice shall also be published in the websites of this Court as well as that of J.P.S.C. Let paper books be filed containing all the materials which were part of the pleadings before the learned First Court as well as before the appeal bench.
Having considered Mr. Mazumdar's submission that there was substantial deviation from the published rules, we are of opinion that the examination may continue, but result may not be published without leave of this Court. We are passing this order considering the fact that large number of examinees are sitting in the examination today itself and balance of convenience or inconvenience lies in permitting the examination to be held as per schedule.
Let the appeal be listed for "final disposal" on 25th February, 2019. On the next date of hearing, affidavit shall be filed by the appellants disclosing therein the factum of publication of the notice as directed by us in this order.
I.A. No. 766 of 2019
The applicant's case in I.A. No. 766 of 2019 shall also be guided by the same order.
I.A. No. 11253 of 2018
I.A. No. 11253 of 2018 has been filed for stay of operation of the judgment under appeal by the appellants. As we propose to hear out the main appeal, we do not consider it necessary to independently address this application.
This application shall stand disposed of.
-4-I.A. No. 557 of 2019
I.A. No. 557 of 2019 has been taken out by the appellants primarily praying for bringing on records certain additional documents. We are apprised by Mr. Mazumdar that these documents form part of the writ petition.
As we have directed filing of paper books, there is no necessity of permitting any independent supplementary affidavit to bring on records the materials which were there before the learned First Court.
This I.A. also stands disposed of.
(Aniruddha Bose, C.J.) (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Birendra/