This writ petition challenged the result of a screening test for the post of Commercial Tax Inspector. The Court dismissed the petition, finding the petitioners failed to possess requisite recognized computer qualifications by the cut-off date.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18463 of 2018
Petitioner :- Surya Bhushan Prasad And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,M.N. Singh
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard Sri Santosh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri M.N.Singh, learned counsel for respondents no. 2 & 3.
Short counter affidavit filed by Sri M.N.Singh on behalf of respondents no. 2 & 3 today is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he does not want to file any rejoinder affidavit thereto.
The writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the result of the screening test held on 18.03.2018 by the Commercial Tax Department in pursuance of an advertisement no. 02/2014-14 and permitting them to appear in the interview which is scheduled to be held from 11.09.2018 to 15.09.2018.
The facts, as pleaded, in the writ petition is that the petitioners hold the requisite qualifications as prescribed in the advertisement for the post of Commercial Tax Inspector and have appeared in the screening examination/test. However, they have been informed by the respondents no. 2 & 3 that their qualification in computer course is not recognized and as such, they have not been called for the interview. The petitioners have also filed a supplementary affidavit stating therein that the computer courses done by them are approved by the Government of India as well as UGC, DOECCC & AICTE.
In the short counter affidavit that has been filed today on behalf of the respondents no. 2 & 3, it has been stated that as far as the petitioner no. 1 is concerned, the PostGraduate degree in Mathematics as has been submitted by him was issued on 6.6.2015 whereas the cut-off date for submission of the application forms was 30.10.2014 and as such, apparently, the petitioner no. 1 was not possessed of essential qualification no. (1) on or before the cut-off date. With regard to essential qualification no. (2), the petitioner no. 1 has submitted Advance Diploma in Computer Application certificate issued by Bharatiya Computer Saksharta Mission from Drona College of Technology & Management, Allahabad, which is not a recognized institution and its name does not figure in the list of the recognized institutions provided by the State Government
as evinced from the letter dated 2.8.2016, filed as annexure-CA-1 to the short counter affidavit. With regard to petitioner no. 2, it has been stated that as far as the essential qualification no. (2) is concerned, he has submitted the Advance Diploma in Computer Application issued by Bharatiya Computer Saksharta Mission, Allahabad, which is not a recognized institution and its name does not figure in the list of the recognized institutions provided by the State Government vide its letter dated 2.8.2016.
With regard to the Post-Graduate Diploma in Computer Application certificate issued by Swami Vivekanand Subharati University, Meerut that has been submitted by the petitioner no. 2, the same has been issued on 12.11.2016 whereas the cut-off date for submission of the application forms was 30.10.2014 and as such, on or before the cut-off date the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification of the Post-Graduate Diploma in Computer Application. The petitioner no. 2 has not brought on record his Post-Graduate Diploma in Computer Application certificate issued by Swami Vivekanand Subharati University, Meerut on 12.11.2016 and this is a disclosure which has also been made by the respondents in their short counter affidavit. Since the learned counsel for the petitioners has chosen not to file any rejoinder affidavit denying the allegations of the short counter affidavit, we assume the correctness of the averments made in the short counter affidavit. The petitioner no. 1 has relied upon the Post-Graduate degree in Mathematics that has been filed by him as annexure-SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit in which the date of issuance of MA Final Year Examination of Mathematics is 10.09.2009. However, from a perusal of paragraph 5 of the writ petition, we find that the petitioner no. 1 has enclosed the mark-sheet of PostGraduate Degree in Mathematics that has been issued on 6.6.2015. The petitioner no. 1 has not been able to point out that in pursuance of the advertisement, he had filed the mark-sheet issued on 10.09.2009 or the one issued on 06.06.2015.
In view of nondenial of these facts by the petitioners, the rebuttal made by the respondents no. 2 & 3 in their counter affidavit has to be believed to be correct. Moreover, the essential qualification in computer is 'O' Level Diploma in Computer awarded by D.O.E.A.C.C. Society or at least one year Diploma in Computer Science from any recognised University/Institution. In the short counter affidavit filed today on behalf of the respondents no. 2 & 3, they have brought on record the list of institutions that have been accredited and recognised by the State Government for the purpose of educational qualifications in computer as required in the advertisement in question.
It is clear from perusal of the short counter affidavit that
the requisite qualifications, as envisaged in the advertisement, have not been obtained by the petitioners inasmuch as the Bharatiya Computer Saksharta Mission and Swami Vivekanand Subharati University, Meerut which have issued the certificates to the petitioners are not among the institutions mentioned in the list of recognised institutions filed with the counter affidavit.
In view of above facts and discussions, we do not find any good reason to intervene in the matter.
The writ petition lacks merit and accordingly stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 11.9.2018 nd
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of screening test results deserves intervention given lack of non-cognizable jurisdiction.
Whether petitioners satisfy the essential qualification of recognized computer course prior to the cut-off date.
Whether the evidence of unrecogized institutions and late certification justifies dismissal of the petition.
Surya Bhushan Prasad And Another
State Of U.P.
B. Amit Sthalekar
Jayant Banerji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
