Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2.7 The applicant, being fully eligible, applied online. His candidature was initially accepted and Roll No. 18 was allotted by UPSC. However, by communication dated 22.11.2017, his candidature was rejected on the ground that "experience certificate not attached for JRF and SRF". 2.8 Learned counsel for the applicant stated that, unlike other candidates who were issued letters granting time to rectify deficiencies, no such opportunity was given to the applicant. On learning of the rejection, the applicant made a representation dated 01.12.2017 through e-mail, hand delivery, and speed post, enclosing the experience certificate for JRF and SRF issued by Delhi University. Item No.44/ Court-III O.A. No.1018/2018 2.9 In response, UPSC issued communication dated 04.01.2018 (impugned rejection order), wherein it was stated that although the experience certificate for JRF and SRF was attached, the same did not contain the nature of duties/research work, and hence the application was treated as "Incomplete Application".

"Order dated 07.03.2018 The applicant applied for the post of Scientist 'B' Documents in response to advertisement inviting applications by the Union Public Service Commission. His application has been rejected on the ground that his experience certificate did not contain the nature of duties/research work so it was treated as incomplete application. The applicant has referred to condition no. 6(A)(h)(vi) which inter alia provides that the 'Candidates are not required to submit to the Commission either by post or by hand the printouts of their online applications or any other document. They will be required to bring along with them the printouts of their online applications and the documents mentioned in para 7 below if called for interview.' It is stated that the applicant has a right to produce these documents at the time of interview as well. To the contrary, Mr. RV Sinha, learned counsel, who appeared on advance notice, has referred to condition no. 6(A)(ii)(d) of the same clause wherein it is prescribed that Candidates should mention the entire experience claimed in the prescribed performa. It is accordingly argued that since the applicant did not comply with this condition, his application has been treated as incomplete and accordingly, it is submitted that it has been rightly rejected.

Lacking essential experience," and "Incomplete Application."

3.7 The applicant, Shri Ali Raza, Roll No.18/Gen., also applied. His application, however, was rejected as "Incomplete Application" because his experience certificates for JRF and SRF did not mention the nature of duties/research work in the field of documents. They contained only a vague reference to "forensic analysis of inks, dyes and samples." This does not satisfy the Recruitment Rules, which required specific experience of analytical methods and research in documents.

Jagannath Mishra (2003) 9 SCC 237. None of these infirmities are present here.

3.14 Learned counsel further stated that while it is true that some candidates were provisionally called to produce ancillary documents such as caste certificates or affidavits regarding name changes, however, that cannot be compared with essential Item No.44/ Court-III O.A. No.1018/2018 experience, which is the core qualification. Experience certificates cannot be supplemented or rectified after the last date. Thus, the applicant could not be extended any further indulgence. 3.15 In these circumstances, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the Original Application is wholly misconceived. The rejection of the applicant's candidature as "Incomplete Application" is strictly in accordance with the Recruitment Rules, advertisement conditions and settled judicial principles. Both his representations dated 01.12.2017 and 19.02.2018 were duly examined and rejected with reasons. There is neither arbitrariness nor discrimination. 3.16 In support of respondents' case, learned counsel for the respondents relies upon the following case laws:-