Pal, J. - (1.) This is an appeal filed by the Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran Pvt. Ltd., against the order passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition and directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner in the post concerned.
(2.) The facts are that pursuant to an advertisement published on 28th October, 1996 the writ petitioner, who is the respondent herein, applied for the posts of Maintenance Assistant (Grade-1) and Electrical/Electronic and Process Assistant (Grade-1). The petitioner appeared in the written examination. Thereafter, on 20th February, 1997 the Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (for short "IBPS") issued a letter asking/advising the petitioner to appear for interview. The petitioner appeared. By a letter dated 27th July, 1998 it was intimated that the name of the petitioner had been recommended by the IBPS and accordingly it was included in the waiting list of candidates on the basis of educational qualifications and work experience declared by the respondent. It was further intimated that the mere inclusion of the name in the waiting list would not confer any right to be appointed. Since there was no response, being apprehensive the respondent herein made a representation before the appellant and came to learn that he was not favoured with an employment as he did not fulfil the eligibility criterion prescribed in the advertisement. Thereafter, being aggrieved, the petitioner moved a writ petition praying for direction upon the respondents to give effect to the letter dated 27th July, 1998 and to take steps for appointing the petitioner in the post of Process Assistant (Grade-1). Pursuant to directions affidavits were filed. The learned Single Judge by its judgement and order dated 16th July, 2002 allowed the writ petition. Thus, the instant appeal.
(3.) Mr. Hirak Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the appellant along with Mr. Soumen Sen relying on the judgement of the Apex Court in Ashoke Kumar Sharma & Ors. v. Chander Sekhar & Anr., reported in (1997)4 SCC 18, submitted that since the respondent herein had acquired the National Apprenticeship Certificate (for short "NAG") in November, 1997 that is much after the last date of advertisement-viz. 23.11.96, the candidature was liable to be cancelled. Submission was made that the letter dated 7th April, 1999 does not categorically state that the course pursued by the respondent was equivalent to the course as stipulated in the advertisement dated 28th October, 1996. It was submitted that the essential qualification prescribed was a certificate from any recognized ITI or NAC in binding/mechanical/electrical/electronics to make one eligible for appearing for the said post. Since in the call letter for personal interview dated 20th February, 1997 it was categorically mentioned that candidature of ineligible candidate would be liable to be cancelled at any stage, the same was accordingly cancelled.;