ARINDAM SINHA,J. - (1.) Mr. Ali, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and on earlier occasion had submitted on essential experience qualification for selection to post advertised, in this case, Deputy Registrar, Backward Class Welfare (BCW). He had submitted, it is true his client did not serve as Assistant Registrar or equivalent post for five years, which experience was required as an essential qualification. He also submitted, this eligibility criteria could be relaxed as notified in advertisement dated 1st December, 2016 and accordingly case of mistake made in overlooking his client lacking this essential qualification should not be accepted but seen to be as the requirement relaxed.
(2.) Today he relies on memo dated 27th December, 2016 being corrigendum to the advertisement in which relaxation with regard to academic qualification in relation to posts, including post for which his client had applied, have been provided. He submits, his client belonging to Scheduled Caste category is entitled to this relaxation. Further relaxation regarding essential qualification of experience must be deemed to have been made in exercise of power as notified in the advertisement itself.
(3.) He relies on judgment of Supreme Court in Chancellor v. Dr. Bijayananda Kar reported in (1994) 1 Supreme Court Cases 169 , to paragraphs 2, 3, 8 and 9. He submits, Supreme Court had said function of selection committee comes to an end when the process of selection is completed and the proceedings are drawn. Every member of selection committee has right to give his independent, not biased and considered opinion in respect of each candidate appearing before the committee. Normally, it would not be considered a bona fide act on part of a member of selection committee to say after selection is over, he overlooked certain qualifications in respect of a candidate. Sanctity of process of selection has to be maintained.;