Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 76 (HP)

Rajneesh Chauhan v. State of H. P.

2017-02-23

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2017
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The petitioner seeks a direction for postponement/rescheduling of the Allied Services Main Examination scheduled on 25th and 26th February, 2017, on the ground that there is a clash of the following examinations which are also going to be held on 26.02.2017:- 1. Examination of E.P.F.O. conducted by UPSC. II. Examinations of Subordinate Allied Services Mains by H.P. Public Service Commission, Shimla. III. Examination conducted by H.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission, Hamirpur, H.P. IV. Examinations conducted by Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education for the posts of Bank Clerk. V. Examinations conducted by HRTC for the posts of Traffic Manager. 2. When the case was taken up on 22.2.2017, Mr. D.K. Khanna, learned counsel for Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission apprised the Court that a meeting had already been convened by his client on 22.02.2017 at 3:00 p.m., wherein issue regarding postponement of the examination in question is going to be discussed. In view of the statement, the matter was adjourned for today. 3. Today, Mr. D.K. Khanna, Advocate, has placed before this Court the details of the deliberations held on 22.2.2017, which reads as under:- 1. Said examination is scheduled to be held on 25th & 26th February, 2017 and 1,292 candidates have qualified in the Preliminary examination, these candidates will appear in the Main examination. All candidates have been intimated regarding the date fixed for the said examination i.e.25th &26th February, 2017 at Shimla spread over 4 examination centres. It would be difficult and financially taxing for the candidates in case the said examination is postponed at this belated stage. 2. As also detailed in CWP No.306/2017 by the Petitioner Sh. Rajneesh Chauhan Vs. HPPSC on 26th February, 2017, which are in the knowledge of the petitioner. It is not possible to schedule such examinations in a way that they do not clash with some other competitive exams. This is normal problem faced by various examining bodies. Keeping in view the number of candidates, such examinations are generally scheduled on a Sunday/holiday when Educational Institutions make available the use of their class rooms for the conduct of these examinations. 3. If examinations are to be postponed and rescheduled on the representation of some individuals it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible to reschedule examinations in such a way that the date of the examination do not clash with any other exam. 4. 3. If examinations are to be postponed and rescheduled on the representation of some individuals it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible to reschedule examinations in such a way that the date of the examination do not clash with any other exam. 4. It may be appreciated that throughout the year there are a number of academic examinations being conducted by various Universities as well as competitive exams conducted by Union Public Service Commission, Staff Selection Commission Govt of India, State Public Service Commissions, State Staff Selection Commissions, for Banks, Insurance Companies etc. HPPSC is not in a position to schedule exams after confirming examinations dates from all such entities. 5. Postponement of this examination shall have spiraling effect on scheduling/re-scheduling of other competitive examination like H.P. Judicial Services, H.P. Administrative Services examination, Naib Tehsildar, HP Forest Services, Range Officers etc. which are scheduled to be held in near future. 6. The candidates is required to exercise his/her option as to which exam he/she wants to attempt, in case of such bunching of exams. 4. It cannot be disputed that fixation of schedule for examination is a policy decision taken after considering various administrative factors, leaving the Court practically with little scope of interference. Undoubtedly, the petitioner is in a dilemma to make up his mind in which one of the examination he should appear. But then, all the examinations being held on either 25th and 26th February, 2017 are being held by independent autonomous bodies, who are entitled to determine their own calendar of the examinations. In most of these examinations, the candidates for all over country are eligible to participate and invariable dates for such examination are already notified in advance. A large number of candidates are involved, who obviously must have made their arrangements for taking the examinations at one place or the other. 5. In the instant case, there are 1,292 candidates and the examination is spread over four examination centers and therefore, dates of the instant examination cannot be altered to their detriment, who have accordingly chalked out their programmes for taking these examinations. 6. 5. In the instant case, there are 1,292 candidates and the examination is spread over four examination centers and therefore, dates of the instant examination cannot be altered to their detriment, who have accordingly chalked out their programmes for taking these examinations. 6. This court otherwise cannot be oblivious to the fact that the respondent No. 2 does not have the requisite infrastructure for conducting these examination and has to depend upon the Infrastructure of the State more particularly the school buildings which obviously would be available only in later part of Saturday and on Sunday. 7. Though, the petitioner would vehemently plead that the Public Service Commission be directed to draw up its calendar in a manner so as to ensure minimum clash of dates. But that is a nigh impossibility, particularly because of the varied examination being taken by the candidates themselves and it would be impossible to accommodate each one of the candidates. This would in fact thwart the whole process of the examination which has been set in motion and delay in recruitment shall be to the detriment of all concerned including the departments which has sought recruitment. 8. As observed earlier, majority of examinations are fixed on later half of Saturdays and on Sundays and public holidays because of convenience of holding these examinations and that is why there is hardly any examination conducted on week days. It is not difficult to imagine that like the respondent No. 2, so many authorities like Government, Boards, Corporations, Banks etc. would also be conducting various examinations throughout the country invariably that too on weekend and therefore there is bound to be clash of dates of such examination. In such a scenario, it would neither be prudent nor advisable for the Courts to step in each time in event of such clash. It would rather be dangerous if the court starts interfering to upset the schedule of the examination. It is for the candidates to prioritize and choose which one of the examination they intended to appear. 9. In view of aforesaid discussion, there is not merit in the case and the same is dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs.