Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 468 (JHR)

Anulica Kumar v. State of Jharkhand

2014-04-03

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2014
Order Heard counsel for the parties. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, under Advertisement No.04/2013 issued by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission for recruitment to the post of Scientific Assistant, the education qualification prescribed for the post of Scientific Assistant (Chemistry & others) at column-3 is M.Sc (Chemistry), though recruitment is being made for subjects of Chemistry and other forensic sciences. The petitioner is a Post Graduate in Forensic Science who apprehends that his application would not be considered by the respondents for the said post. The petitioner also relies upon advertisement issued by the Forensic Science Laboratory, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi as also the advertisement issued by the Bihar Public Service Commission for appointment to the similar post which includes the educational qualification of M.Sc (Forensic Science) apart from other post graduate qualifications in science subjects. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid corrigendum of BPSC was issued pursuant to a direction passed by the Patna High Court in the writ petition being CWJC No. 2872/2010 preferred by the affected candidate in similar circumstances under an advertisement issued by the Bihar Public Service Commission. The said judgment dated 22nd February 2010 is annexed as annexure-3 to the writ petition to support the aforesaid submission. It is submitted that the last date for making on line application is 03rd April 2014 i.e. today. In such circumstances, the writ petition has been argued. 4. Counsel for the State is present. It is submitted that the Commission which has issued the advertisement, is not represented before this Court today and it may be noticed in the matter. It is however not disputed that the appointment are to be made under the State Government. 5. Upon hearing the counsel for the petitioner and the State, this Court is of the consistent view that ordinarily, the qualification to be prescribed in the advertisement are within the domain of the policy decision of the employer which the Court are loath to interfere unless they are shown to be irrational or contrary to the statutory provisions. The petitioner appears to have approached this Court late in the day, though advertisement is of the year 2013. From the said advertisement, it is apparent that the date of exam have yet not been announced. Today is the last date for making on line application. The petitioner appears to have approached this Court late in the day, though advertisement is of the year 2013. From the said advertisement, it is apparent that the date of exam have yet not been announced. Today is the last date for making on line application. This Court, in the circumstances is not inclined to interfere with the terms and conditions of the advertisement. However, the petitioner is given liberty to make a representation with full disclosure of his qualifications and relevant technical requirement for appointment to the said post in which, according to him, M.Sc (Forensic Science) should also be included as a minimum educational criteria for consideration of the claim of the petitioner and other similarly situated persons. 6. Let such a representation be made within a period of three days before the respondent no. 3 - Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through its Chairman, Ranchi. If the representation of the petitioner finds favour with the respondents, it would be open to them to consider the desirability of issuing any corrigendum in the matter to include the said subject for consideration of eligible candidate having the said qualification of M.Sc (Forensic Science) for the purposes of recruitment under the post advertised under advertisement no. 04/2013. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any comment upon the merits of the case and further, if the respondents do chose to include the said qualification for the said post, equal opportunity should be provided to all concern. Respondents are expected to take a decision in the matter as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks. However, such a decision will also not mean to withheld the process which may have commenced pursuant to the advertisement in question. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Given the exigency of the matter, on the request of the counsel for the parties, let a copy of the order be handed over to them by tomorrow.