Sudhir Narain, J. - (1.) THESE special appeals arise out of the order/judgment of the learned single Judge, dated 7.2.1995, allowing the writ petition of the petitioner-respondents and issuing direction to the appellants to consider their case for the purpose of recruitment to the Post of Assistant, a class Illrd post in the Life Insurance Corporation (in short the L. I. C).
(2.) THE facts in brief are that on 7th December, 1992 an advertisement was published by the North Central Zone of the Life Insurance Corporation, Kanpur inviting applications for the Post of Assistant in various Divisions of Life Insurance Corporation in Uttar Pradesh. In the advertisement published in Dainik Jagaran' dated 7.12.1992, the last date for submission of the application form was mentioned as 28.12.1992 which was later on extended to 11.1.1993. Clause 12 of the advertisement provided that along with the application attested copies relating to age. educational qualification, etc. should be attached. As regards ex-serviceman in Army, the service discharge certificate was to be attached. The petitioner-respondents applied for appointment to the post of Assistant in pursuance of the advertisement notice dated 7.12.1992 against the quota reserved for ex-servicemen. They also annexed with the application a no-objection certificate given by their officers, mentioning therein the date on which they were to be discharged/ released from Air Force Combat Service. Those dates were admittedly after the last date fixed for submitting the application, i.e., 11.1.1993. The respondents were asked to appear in written test and later on called for interview .A list of successful candidates was published and the respondents were shown as successful candidates in the said list. On 17.11.1993, letters were issued by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, North Central Zone, asking the respondents to report for medical examination on 4.12.1993. It was mentioned that in case the candidate is medically found fit for appointment, he will be required to undergo the critical training at Divisional Office, Meerut for a period of two weeks and practical training at any branch office. Subsequently, the respondents were given letters dated 3.12.1993 on 4.12.1993 informing them that their candidature for appointment as Assistant in the Corporation cannot be considered as they were not actually discharged on or before 3.11.1992. The petitioner-respondents aggrieved against such letters filed separate writ petition. The learned single Judge decided all those writ petitions by a common judgment and gave a direction to the appellants to consider their candidature on the finding that they were eligible for appointment to the post of Assistant as ex-servicemen. It was held that as no cut-off date was mentioned in the advertisement for discharge/release of the respondents from service, they shall be deemed to be qualified and eligible for appointment as they were discharged/released from service by the date the interview for their appointment to the post of Assistant was taken. We have heard Sri R. P. Goel, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri S. C. Budhwar and Arun Tandon, learned counsel for the respondents.
(3.) FROM the respective submissions of learned counsel for the parties, three main points arise in these appeals. The first point raised on behalf of the appellants is that the eligibility of a candidate is to be determined on the date mentioned in the advertisement and if no cut-off date is mentioned in the advertisement, the last date of submission of the application as given in the advertisement should be taken as cut-off date for determining the eligibility of the candidate. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance upon various decisions. In Smt. Rekha Chaturvedi v. University of Rajasthan and others, 1993 (Suppl.) 3 SCC 168, it was held that in absence of fixed date indicated in the advertisement/notification inviting applications with reference to which requisite qualifications should be Judged, the last date of making the application should be taken as fixed date. The reason for it was given as under : "The date of selection is invariably uncertain. In the absence of knowledge of such date the candidates who apply for the posts would be unable to state whether they are qualified for the posts in question or not, if they are yet to acquire the qualifications. Unless the advertisement mentions a fixed date with reference to which the qualifications are to be judged, whether the said date is of selection or otherwise, it would not be possible for the candidates who do not possess the requisite qualifications in praesenti even to make applications for the posts. The uncertainty of the date may also lead to a contrary consequence, viz., even those candidates who do not have the qualifications in praesenti and are likely to acquire them at an uncertain future date, may apply for the posts thus swelling the number of applications. But a still worse consequence may follow, in that it may leave open a scope for malpractices. The date of selection may be so fixed or manipulated as to entertain some applicants and reject others, arbitrarily. Hence, in the absence of a fixed date indicated in the advertisement/notification inviting applications with reference to which the requisite qualifications should be judged, the only certain date for the scrutiny of the qualifications will be the last date for making the applications." The above view was reiterated in Dr. AT. B. Nair v. Union of India and others, 1993 (2) SCC 429.;