Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Kavita Gulati Batra vs Union Of India Through Its on 17 December, 2013
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A.No.681/2013
Tuesday, this the 17th day of December 2013
Honble Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj, Member (J)
Honble Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)
Kavita Gulati Batra, aged about 47 years
r/o AG-I, 102 D, Vikaspuri
New Delhi-18
.. Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. S N Sharma)
Versus
1. Union of India through its
Secretary, Ministry of Defence
South Block, New Delhi
2. The Chairman
UPSC
Dholpur House,
Shahjahan Road
New Delhi
3. Ministry of Defence
Director (Estt.I/GP-III)
Sena Bhawan, New Delhi-11
..Respondents
(By Advocates: Mr. Ashok Kumar for respondent Nos. 1 & 3
Mr. Rajinder Nischal for respondent No.2)
O R D E R (ORAL)
Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj:
As can be gathered from the reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2, i.e., Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), certain vacancies of Section Officers /Stenographers (Grade-B/ Grade-I) to be filled up on the basis of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination 2009, 2010 and 2011 were notified on 15.9.2012. The candidates were required to submit online application for the said examination from 25th September to 15th October 2012 and to send a signed (print thereof) application endorsed through their Head of Department /Office by 29.10.2912, which was the last date of receipt of applications. Admittedly, the applicant submitted her online application on 1.10.2012 and was allotted a registration ID No.11216000410 for the examination. When the applicant could not receive the admit card for the examination, she inquired from the concerned authorities in the Department about the reason for the same and could be informed that by mistake her application could not be forwarded to UPSC. Thereafter a duly signed application was forwarded by the Department on 6.12.2012 to the UPSC. Accepting the application, the UPSC allowed the applicant to download her e-admit card and accordingly she was allowed to participate in the examination held on 15th and 16th December 2012. Thereafter, the UPSC issued communication dated 19.12.2012 informing the applicant that her application for the examination for Section Officers /Stenographers (Grade-B/ Grade-I) Limited Departmental Competitive Examination 2009, 2010 and 2011 had been rejected for the reason that her second application, though being complete, was without departmental endorsement and received late by UPSC. Against the said decision, the applicant made representations dated 28.1.2013 and 4.2.2013 to the Commission, which were turned down in terms of the impugned order dated 8.2.2013, thus the applicant has filed the present Original Application praying therein:
(a) Quash the impugned order dated 19.12.2012 and 8.2.2013;
(b) Direct the respondents i.e. UPSC to declare the result of the applicant after evaluation of the answer sheet alongwith the other candidates and if applicant comes in merits should be selected in accordance with the recruitment rules.
(c) Pass any other order which this Honble Tribunal may deems fit and proper.
2. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that in view of the Brief Notice dated 11.12.2012 published in the Times of India, once the applicant had submitted her application online, the respondents could not have rejected her candidature. He also submitted that subsequently the applicant had submitted a duly signed application, which was forwarded by respondent Nos. 1 and 3 (Union of India, Ministry of Defence) to respondent No.2 (UPSC) and once the applicant had been allowed to participate in the examination, her candidature could not have been cancelled afterwards.
3. On the other hand, Mr. Rajinder Nischal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 UPSC submitted that in the Notice of examination itself it was categorically mentioned that only those candidates whose printed copy of online application was forwarded by their Head of Department/ Office would be considered for admission to the examination. The Note below the said Notice dated 15.9.2012, referred to by learned counsel for respondent No.2, reads as under:
Note : Only those candidates whose printed copy of online application is forwarded by their Head of Department/Office will be considered for admission to this Examination. They should further note that the Commission will in no case be responsible for non-receipt of their application or any delay in receipt thereof on any account whatsoever. No application, received after the prescribed last date for receipt of printed copy of the application in the Commission through proper channel, will be entertained under any circumstances and all the late applications will be summarily rejected. They should, therefore, ensure that after verifying the relevant entries and completing the endorsement at the end of the application form, their applications are forwarded by their Department or Head of Office, so as to reach the Commissions Office on or before the prescribed last date.
4. Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 submitted that the said respondents have no objection to the prayer made in the Original Application. In the counter reply filed on their behalf, it is admitted that on 6.12.2012 the applicant submitted a letter to the Under Secretary, Ministry of Defence, requesting him to forward her application to UPSC. According to said respondents, acceding to the request of the applicant, they had forwarded the said application to UPSC. For easy reference, paragraph 4 of the reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 reads as follows:
4. On 6th December, 2012, Smt. Kavita Gulati Batra (Applicant) submitted a letter to Under Secretary, D (Est.I/Gp.II), Ministry of Defence requesting him to forward her application to UPSC. Smt. Kavita Gulati Batra (Applicant) also stated that she signed the application form on 6th December, 2012 (Annexure R-7).
Thus, she signed the application form only on 6th December, 2012 and, acceding to the request of the Applicant made vide her letter dated 6th December, 2012 (Annexure R-7), the application of the Applicant was forwarded to the UPSC by Ministry of Defence immediately on the same day, with the approval of Respondent No.3 (Annexure R-8). In the forwarding letter dated 6th December, 2012 (Annexure R-8), it was clearly mentioned that as the application form of Smt. Kavita Gulati Batra was not signed by her, the same could not be forwarded to UPSC alongwith application forms of other officials of Ministry of Defence, UPSC was requested to consider the application favourably as she had already applied online.
5. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the records.
6. Normally in view of the terms of the Notice of examination only such candidates whose printed copy of online application was forwarded by their Head of Department/ Office could be considered for admission to the examination. In the present case, the applicant had taken the printout of her application and submitted to the competent authority in her Department to forward the same in terms of the conditions of the Note. However, on account of sheer mistake, the application could not be forwarded within the specified time limit. When the applicant could not receive the admit card and inquired from the UPSC as also respondent Nos. 1 and 3 about the reason for the same, she could know that the Department committed a mistake in not forwarding her application. Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 could not put forth satisfactory explanation for not apprising the deficiency, if any, in the application of the applicant to be forwarded to UPSC. Once respondent Nos. 1 and 3 kept the application of the applicant pending in their record, did not point out any defect in the same and did not forward it to UPSC, the applicant cannot be made to suffer for their lapse. Even otherwise also, in the Note contained in Notice dated 15.9.2012, it is provided that the candidates, who printed out the copy online and got the same forwarded by the Head of Department / Office to UPSC, will be considered for admission to the examination. In the present case, the application put forth by the applicant on 6.12.2012 was duly forwarded by her employer to the UPSC and considering such application, the UPSC allowed her to download the admit card and participate in the examination. It was only after she participated in the examination on 15th and 16th September 2013 that her candidature was cancelled.
7. In our considered view, when the Head of Department had forwarded the application of the applicant and the UPSC had entertained it, in one way, they found the conditions of the aforementioned Note satisfied or condoned the same. Even otherwise also, the object and intent of the Note mentioned in the Notice of examination dated 15.9.2012 regarding condition of forwarding of application by the Head of Department/ Office is only that the concerned Department should have no objection to the candidature of the applicant in the examination and there should be nothing adverse against him / her pending in the organization. In the detailed counter reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3, it is nowhere mentioned that they ever had any objection to the candidature of the applicant for the examination or there is anything adverse pending against her in the department.
8. We are also of the view that having due regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, before canceling the candidature of the applicant, the UPSC ought to have apprised her regarding the defect, if any, in the procedure followed by her in submitting the second application and also give her opportunity to cure such defects. Besides in Brief Notice dated 11.12.2012 published in the Times of India, it is specifically provided that the particulars of such candidates whose candidature was cancelled, were displayed at the official website of UPSC and once the name of the applicant did not figure in the list of rejected candidates, a presumption arises that the UPSC had considered and approved her candidature in all respects. For easy reference, the relevant excerpt of the said Brief Notice reads as under:-
Brief Notice Combined SOs/ Stenos (Grade B/ Grade I) Limited Departmental Competitive Examination 2009, 2010 & 2011 Union Public Service Commission will be conducting the Combined SOs/Stenos (Grade B/Grade I) Limited Departmental Competitive Examination 2009, 2010 & 2011 commencing from 15.12.2012 to 17.12.2012 for all candidates and 17.12.2012 for stenography test only in Delhi. The Commission has uploaded the e-admit Cards for the convenience of the admitted candidate(s) as well as the reasons/ground for rejection of application on its website (http://www.upsc.gov.in). The candidates are advised to download their e-Admit Cards and take a printout thereof. The admitted candidates will have to produce the printout of their e-Admit Cards at the allotted venue for appearing in the examination. In case the photograph is not visible or available on the e-Admit Cards candidates are advised to carry identical photographs (one photograph for each session) alongwith proof of identity such as Identity Card or Voter Identity Card or Passport or Driving License and the printout of e-Admit Card at the venue of the Examination. No proper Admit Card will be issued for this examination by the Commission.
The candidates are advised to take a printout of the e-Admit Card well in advance to avoid last minute rush. In the past cases have been noticed where some candidates have faced difficulty in accessing the server on the last day on account of server overload.
In case of any discrepancy in the e-Admit the same may be communicated to the Commission immediately by e-mail (e-mail ID usengg-upsc&nic.in) latest by 10.12.2012 to enable the Commission to take a decision in the matter.
Candidates are also advised to refer to the detailed instruction for the examination including those for the Stenography test as uploaded on the official website of the Commission i.e. http://www.upsc.gov.in. (emphasis supplied)
9. In view of the aforementioned, the impugned orders cannot be countenanced and are accordingly quashed. The Original Application stands allowed. No order as to costs.
( Shekhar Agarwal ) ( A.K. Bhardwaj ) Member (A) Member (J) December 17, 2013 /sunil/