SHRI. DUSU LODER Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Shri. Dusu Loder
State of Arunachal Pradesh and Others
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Heard Mr. D. Panging, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Pangu, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents and Mr. C. Modi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 7 to 9.
(2.) Vide Advertisement No. DFCS/ESTT/EDD-406/08/(Pt-II), dated 25.10.2016, published in local daily paper, the Directorate of Food and Civil Supplies, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, invited application from interested persons for filling up four posts of drivers. Following the advertisement, the petitioner along with several other candidates applied for the same. On 17.01.2017 and 18.01.2017, driving test of the candidates was held and among all the candidates 17 candidates were declared successful and they were called for the interview/viva voce test on 19.01.2017. After viva voce was held result was declared vide Notification dated 23.01.2017, and the result is given here below;-
"Government of Arunachal Pradesh
Directorate of Food and Civil Supplies
No. DFCS/ESTT/EDD-640/08(Pt) Dated, Naharlagun, 25th Jan. 2017
In continuation of the Driving Test and Viva Voce conducted on 18th and 19th Jan. 2017 for recruitment 04(four) post of Driver under the Directorate of Food and Civil Supplies, the following candidates are selected for the post of Driver;-
1. Shri. Kenli Rina
2. Shri. Tobiyang Borang
3. Shri. Byabang Matha
4. Shri. Bado Dini
The waiting list candidates are;-
1. Shri. Dana Buru
2. Shri. Oterson Modi
3. Shri. Tamik Gamoh
The list is in order of merit.
Sd/- (L. Borang),Director,Food & Civil Supplies,Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Naharlagun".
On the same day, appointment order of the four successful candidates was issued being No. DFCS/ESTT/EDD-640/08(Pt-II), dated 23.01.2017. Not being satisfied with the result, the petitioner through RTI applied for the mark sheet of the driving test and the interview/viva voce. As per the information received the marks scored by the four selected candidates and the petitioner in both the driving test and in the viva voce which are disputed are as follows;
Marks scored in driving test;-
Marks scored in viva-voce test:-
Total marks obtained by the candidates after adding the marks of driving test and viva voce;-
(3.) The case of the petitioner as submitted by Mr. D. Panging briefly is that while selecting the candidates, the DPC had taken into account the marks scored by them in the driving test but had only taken the marks scored in the viva voce, therefore, the assessment was as per the provision of the recruitment rules. Further, the case of the petitioner is also that if the marks scored by the candidates both in the driving test and viva voce were taken into account together the petitioners' marks would have been higher than that of the respondent No. 7, and he respondent No. 7 would have been selected and appointed to the post of driver. According to the learned counsel, the word 'test' mentioned in the recruitment rules should be understood as driving test, therefore, the marks scored by the candidates in the driving test ought to have been taken into account in the final selection of the candidates. The learned counsel further submitted that the words of 'recruitment rules' should be interpreted keeping in view the object and purpose the legislature intended to achieve with the same. Therefore, the recruitment rules of the drivers has to be interpreted in such a way that it will achieve its objective and purpose. In support of his submission, the learned counsel referred to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Atma Ram Mittal v. Ishwar Singh Punia, reported in AIR 1998 SCC 2031, particularly, paragraph- 8. He also referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of District Mining Officer and Ors., v. Tata Iron and Steel Co. & Another, reported in (2001) 7 SCC 358, paragraph-18.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.