Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: UPSSSC in Namit Kumar Pandey And 8 Others vs State Of U P And 10 Others on 9 September, 2020Matching Fragments
3.13 As per the stand taken by UPSSSC, in the present case 477 posts of General Category were advertised, therefore, 1431 candidates were required to be called for interview applying principle of ''3x'. Since, only 1148 candidates were available in the said category, therefore, even the last candidate from General Category was called for interview. Such last candidate had obtained 0.5 marks in the written examination. In terms of ratio of judgment passed by this Court in Lalit Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors, Writ Petition No.68706 of 2015, decided on 11.1.2016 cut off marks of other categories were also lowered down. On the basis of new cut off marks, the merit list was redrawn and finally the merit list was declared of total number of 6494 candidates who were included within the zone of eligibility for interview and the result of the written examination declared earlier on 29.12.2016 was cancelled and redrawn merit list was declared on 07.1.2019. The candidates were called for interview from 17.1.2019 to 2.2.2019. The UPSSSC issued a new information dated 15.1.2019 for all the candidates who had participated in the written examination to submit their self attested copy of the registration certificate issued by the U.P. State Medical Faculty. In pursuance of the said information 278 candidates, also submitted their certificates and were declared eligible to participate in the interview. Thus, making the total number of candidates to appear in the interview to 3772. The final result was declared on 15.6.2019 against 921 posts of Lab Technician. The final cut of marks after the interview declared by UPSSSC on 15.6.2019, is as follows:
5.03 The UPSSSC has allowed even such candidates who did not possess requisite eligibility before the cut off date to participate in interview and erroneously declared some of them as selected also. The UPSSSC has compromised with the merit, by lowering down the cut off marks upto 0.5 marks which was earlier quite high up to 13 marks for General Category and similarly for other categories also.
6. Submissions on behalf of the respondents.
Submissions are made on behalf of the respondent UPSSSC, selected candidates and State of U.P. Their arguments are also based on the interpretation of the judgment passed by a co-ordinate bench as well as by the Division Bench to state that both the directions passed by the co-ordinate bench were entirely upheld by the Division Bench. The first direction of compliance of mandate of Government Order dated 20.12.2003 was upheld in specific words in para 13 of the judgment of Division Bench that "We, therefore uphold the judgment of the learned Single Judge to that extent", so far as the direction of redrawing the merit list is concerned, it being only a consequential direction need not be affirmed/upheld in specific words, further said direction was not set-aside by the Division Bench.
8.01. The co-ordinate bench found that the UPSSSC has not followed the provisions contained in the Government Order dated 20.12.2003 which requires a candidate to possess Diploma in Lab Technician Trade and shall further required to be registered with U.P. State Medical Faculty to become eligible to participate in the selection process to the post of Lab Technician and on this premise the co-ordinate bench directed to proceed with the selection after taking into account the said provisions. In order to comply the said directions, the UPSSSC has to redraw the merit list to disallow those selected candidates who did not register their names with the U.P. State Medical Faculty, therefore, the second direction for redrawing the list was only a consequential direction in case the direction no.1 is complied with by the UPSSSC.
8.05. From the above, it is absolutely clear that the Division Bench has also directed the UPSSSC to proceed with the examination after taking into consideration the provisions of the Government Order dated 20.12.2003, with further direction to the candidates by granting opportunity to obtain certificates from the U.P. State Medical Faculty and to present before the Commission for consideration of their names also, therefore, the UPSSSC has not committed any fault by granting opportunity to all the candidates to apply and get them registered with the U.P. State Medical Faculty and submit their registration certificates prior to the prescribed date and in order to include names of such candidates, the UPSSSC has rightly redrawn the merit list.