Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: NOC FOR INTERVIEW in Vijay Singh Chandel vs State Of H.P & Others on 6 June, 2025Matching Fragments
8. The respondent-Commission vide advertisement No.25/2019 dated 27.12.2019, advertised two posts of Assistant Professor, General Surgery, in the un-reserved category, wherein, it has been provided that date of determining the eligibility of candidates, in terms of essential qualifications and experience, shall be reckoned as on the closing date of 16.01.2020.
9. As per Clause 3 of advertisement, it was necessary for the candidates to have the required experience for determining his/her eligibility after acquiring the requisite essential qualifications. The candidates in Government service (Regular Service), were required to apply to the Commission along with requisite examination fees with the information to the Head of Departments/Employer for issuing NOC and the candidate was not to be interviewed unless he or she produces NOC from the concerned employer.
The other conditions requiring the NOC, reads as under:
"3. In Government service (regular service) candidates may apply to the Commission along with requisite examination fees with information to their Head of Departments/Employer for issuing NOC. Any candidates, who are in regular Government Service or Government owned Industrial service, will not be interviewed unless he/she produces NOC from the concerned employer."
23. Thus, in the absence of the requisite NOC as a regular service candidate he was not liable to be interviewed and the NOC having been withdrawn for valid reasons as per the provisions of the Rules could not be said to be an arbitrary decision of the State, which can be judicially reviewed and reversed, in any manner.
24. Resultantly, we have come to the conclusion that the petitioner not being eligible as per the statutory rules which provides the necessary qualifications and the minimum qualifications for direct recruits and the minimum educational requirements and the requisite teaching experience which would necessarily be only when the concerned intake of the students would come and not prior to that. Resultantly, the reasoning which has been arrived at by the learned Single Judge cannot be faulted in any manner.