- (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State, as also learned senior counsel for the respondent, Jharkhand Public Service Commission (herein after referred to as J.P.S.C. ).
(2.) An advertisement was issued, being Advertisement No. 01-JET dated 19.7.2006, inviting the applications for appearing in the Eligibility Test for the post of Lecturer in different universities in the State of Jharkhand. The petitioner appeared in the said Eligibility Test, but he was not declared successful in the test and when the petitioner sought information under the Right to Information Act, he was informed by the respondent, J.P.S.C. vide letter dated 25.6.2007, as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ application, that the petitioner had got 52% of the average marks in three papers and according to the U.G.C. guidelines, the cut off marks was fixed as 60% for General and OBC candidates. The petitioner being the OBC candidate, was not declared successful, due to the fact that he had not obtained the minimum cut off marks, fixed by the U.G.C.
(3.) It may be stated that in the meantime, similarly situated another candidate had filed W.P(C) No. 5095 of 2007 (Amardeep v. The State of Jharkhand and Ors.) in this Court, whose candidature was also rejected due to the fact that he had bagged less than 60% of the cut off marks in the three papers in JET Examination. The Hon'ble Single Judge, by order dated 05.03.2009, allowed the writ application in the following terms:- 10. In the instant case minimum marks which a candidate was required to obtain in the written papers in the aggregate was 50% in order to qualify and become eligibile and to be included in the panel. The subsequent prescription of 60% in the aggregate, after the entire process is completed, will certainly amount to amendment of the terms and conditions of the eligibility criteria as advertised. Neither any reason has been assigned not any averment has been made in the counter affidavit as to under what circumstances the change in the criteria was introduced. 11. It has time and again been held that the criteria as advertised for eligibility cannot be changed after selection process is over and the same is on the face of it illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. There is no dispute that the petitioner appeared for the aforesaid test and obtained/secured marks much more than the minimum qualifying marks as advertised but still was declared unsuccessful in view of the enhancement and change in the terms and conditions as per advertisement. 12. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner and declare him as successful candidate for the test conducted by the JPSC and JET for Lectureship 2006 in accordance with the prescribed minimum qualification marks as advertised on 19.7.2006. ;