G.Sathish v. Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR *** WP.CT/60/2023 G.Sathish Vs Union of India and others Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar Ms. Vinita Devi ... for the petitioners Mr. Tulsi Lall ... for the respondents November 23, 2023 [AKB] Item No.2 1.

The writ petition is arising out of an order dated 28th September, 2023 in OA 351/1281/2023 in which the petitioner has prayed for quashing and/or setting aside the select list dated 22nd September, 2023 which was published on 23rd September, 2023 by the authorities for the post of Junior Engineer in Electricity Department. 2.

Shorn of unnecessary details the applicant is a diploma holders and has undergone two years pre-sea training for diploma holders working in the workshop. The petitioner claim to have worked in three organizations including Shipping Corporation of India for a period of two years.

3.

He applied for the post of Junior Engineer in Electricity Department as well as Junior Engineer (E&M) in Port Blair Municipal Council (PBMC) in response to an employment notification by the Electricity Department of the UT Administration. His name appeared in the list of candidates. After verification of his document he did not find the place in the list of candidates selected for appointment hence he filed the original application. Before the Tribunal the authorities have stated that the last date of filling up the online application was 21st May, 2023. The Admit Card (Hall Ticket) for the examination was available for downloading from 9th June, 2023. The applicant downloaded his hall ticket and appeared in the examination on the basis of the said hall ticket.

This hall ticket clearly stated that he was eligible to appear in the selection for the post of JE in PBMC only and not for the post of JE in the Electricity Department. The writ petitioner had adequate time and opportunity between the time that he filled the form and the time the hall ticket was downloaded, to bring it to the notice of the authorities that he was unable to upload his experience certificate issued by the Shipping Corporation of India and two other companies.

Department. He chose to appear in the examination on the basis of the hall ticket issued to him mentioning that he was eligible for the post of HE PBMC only. Admittedly the applicant did not make any representation in time when he found that he was unable to upload the document. The candidates were specifically notified under paragraph 15 of the vacancy notice to contact the authority if their name was not shortlisted after the issue of Admit Cards. Admit card was made available in the month of June, 2023. The hall ticket of the applicant was for the post of JE (E&M) which existed only in PBMC and not for JE in the Electricity Department. As soon as the applicant because aware of the fact that he was being considered in a different department and he wanted to be considered for the post of JE Electricity Department he should have immediately informed the authority concerned in accordance with paragraph 15 of the vacancy notice. 4.

In the JE (E&M) in PBMC he was not found to be successful, thereafter only he raised a plea that he was under the impression that he was eligible for the post of JE Electricity Department until he found that he was not been selected, cannot be accepted at this stage and the Tribunal has in our view correctly did not accept such explanation. He should have been more vigilant and cautious in

selecting the department for which he wanted his candidature to be considered for appointment. 5.

Under such circumstances we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Tribunal. However, at this stage Mr. Kumar has submitted that there are few documents which inadvertently have been left out and not included in the Original Application filed before the Tribunal and the writ petitioner may be allowed to seek a review of the order passed by the learned Tribunal on discovery of such fresh materials. Mr. Kumar has also submitted fairly that some documents have been included in the writ petition that were not filed before the Tribunal. While we are of the opinion that on the basis of the documents disclosed before the tribunal the view taken by the Tribunal appears to be correct, however, it shall not prevent the writ petitioner to seek review of the order on fresh materials.

( Soumen Sen, J. ) (Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J.)