Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) Since the reliefs sought for in both the writ petitions are identical, with the consent of the respective counsels, both the writ petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order/judgment.
(2.) The petitioners in the aforesaid writ applications were candidates on the post of Assistant Mining Officer in pursuance to Advertisement No.7/2016 dated 05.08.2016 call in question the legality and propriety of the short-listing of the candidates for interview to the said post as has been published in the official website of the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, in which scheduled date of interview is on 10.11.2016 and 11.11.2016. The petitioners have further sought for quashing the selection process and also for direction to the respondents to consider their candidature in the selection process inclusive of written test and interview for the purpose of the said appointment.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged the selection process on the ground that the JPSC has conducted the process, is infraction of Jharkhand Public Service Commission Rules and Procedure 2002 and also the Jharkhand Mining Engineering Service Rules, 2011 and subsequent notification dated 20.01.2015 of the amendment of the Rule. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the action of the respondent no.2 in bye-passing the provision given in the advertisement for conducting written test, is smacks of illegality and arbitrary exercise of power and de hors of the Jharkhand Mining Engineering Services Rules, 2011 and its subsequent amendment. In order to substantiate his submission, learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court (Inder Prakash Gupta vs. State of J & K and Ors., 2004 6 SCC 786), the relevant extract at paragraph 28 is quoted hereinbelow: 28. ."The Public Service Commission is also required to be consulted on the matters enumerated under Section 133. While going through the selection process the Commission, however, must scrupulously follow the statutory rules operating in the field. It may be that for certain purposes, for example, for the purpose of shortlisting, it can lay down its own procedure. The Commission, however, must lay down the procedure strictly in consonance with the statutory rules. It cannot take any action which per se would be violative of the statutory rules or makes the same inoperative for all intent and purport. Even for the purpose of shortlisting, the Commission cannot fix any kind of cut-off marks.";