← Library
Calcutta High CourtWP.CT/13/2023dismissed

K.V.Kuriakose v. Union Of India And ORS

2023-07-26Hon'Ble Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty,Hon'Ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] *** WP.CT/13/2023 K.V.Kuriakose Vs.

Union of India and others Mr. K. Sabir ... for the petitioner Mr. V.D. Sivabalan ... for the respondents July 26, 2023 [SR] Item No.5 The present writ petition has been preferred challenging an order dated 22nd April, 2022 passed by the learned Tribunal in the Original Application being OA No.351/718/2022. The supplementary affidavit as filed on behalf of the petitioner be kept on record.

Mr. Sabir, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applied for participation in a selection process initiated by the respondents vide notice dated 27th August, 2021. Though he fulfilled the eligibility criteria his name was illegally incorporated in a list of ineligible candidates published by the respondents with a remark 'ATC not enclosed'. According to Mr. Sabir, the petitioner's candidature could not have been cancelled since he was having the certificate of Apprenticeship Training as required under the Recruitment Rules. Such training certificate has been issued by the competent authority and the same is treated at par with the certificate issued by National Council Of Training For Vocational Trade (NCTVT)/National Apprentice Certificate (NAC), as would be explicit from the certificate itself. As the written examination was scheduled on 24th April, 2022, the petitioner approached the

learned Tribunal challenging the cancellation of his candidature with a prayer for issuance of necessary direction upon the respondents to allow him to participate in the said written test. He submits that the learned Tribunal glossed over the issue as regards equivalence of the petitioner's certificate with the certificate issued by NCTVT and did not return any finding on the same and erred in law in refusing the petitioner's prayer for participation in the written examination. Mr. Sivabalan, learned advocate appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents have conducted the selection process in strict consonance with the relevant rules and in support of such contention, he has drawn our attention to the old Recruitment Rules notified on 18th May, 2012 as well as the subsequent amendment notified on 24th April, 2017.

He has also produced before us the certificates which were accepted by the authorities from the respective candidates. Let such documents, as produced, be kept on record. Copies of the same have been handed over to Mr. Sabir in Court. In the order impugned, the learned Tribunal observed, inter alia, that 'Column 7 does not mention that the Apprentice Training Certificate should be obtained in the relevant trade from Dockyard Apprentice Schools of the Indian Navy.

Further, the note appended thereto (emphasis supplied) is explicit that qualifications are relaxable at the discretion of the appointing authority in the case of candidates otherwise well qualified' and accordingly directed the authorities to consider the case for relaxation of essential conditions if there is lack of suitable candidates with such certificate and to issue a reasoned and speaking order.

refused in view of the amendment of Column 10 of the old Recruitment Rules.

Records reveal that the written test was scheduled on 24th April, 2022 and the Original Application was disposed of two days prior thereto on 22th April, 2022. The writ petition was filed more than one year thereafter on 13th March, 2023. There is no explanation in the application as regards such delay. In the said conspectus and as the learned Tribunal has already directed that the respondents to explore the possibility of relaxation and to consider the petitioner's case if there is lack of suitable candidates, no interference is called for in the present application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, may be supplied to the parties upon compliance of usual formalities.

(Tapabrata Chakraboraty, J.) (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)