Denying marks for courses before cutoff date unjustified, rules Punjab and Haryana High Court

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, December 23

In a significant judgment on uploading documents along with application forms for claiming weightage in recruitment process, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that denying marks for courses undergone much before the cutoff date merely because the proof was of a later date was unjustified. This was especially true when the uploading of the proof was not a requisite as per the advertisement.

HSSC action unsustainable

Advertisement

The denial by Haryana Staff Selection Commission of two marks to the candidate for him having successfully undergone the course is found to be unjust and, thus, unsustainable. Justice Deepak Sibal, High court

“Once the Haryana Staff Selection Commission does not dispute that the petitioner-candidate had actually undergone the course much before the cutoff date, to deny marks allocated for such course only because the certificate/ proof thereof was of a date beyond the cutoff date would be unjustified, especially when in terms of the advertisement, such proof/ certificate was not required to be uploaded along with the application and was required to be produced only at the time of interview, which the petitioner did,” Justice Sibal asserted.

The commission’s stand was that the petitioner, a candidate for constable’s post, had not uploaded a certificate or proof of successfully undergoing NCC course, along with his application. The certificate/ proof produced during his interview was also dated beyond the cutoff date.

Justice Sibal asserted a harmonious reading of the advertisement and the application form led to the irresistible conclusion that an aspiring candidate was only required to divulge in his application the information sought to be elicited from him,

The information relevant to the instant case was whether the candidate had undergone any of the NCC courses. In case of an affirmative answer, the proof of having successfully undergone the course was not required to be uploaded, along with the application. This was because such a certificate did not find a mention in the list of documents given in the advertisement required to be uploaded along with the application.

Justice Sibal asserted the petitioner uploaded his application well before the cutoff date. The proof of passing the course was placed on the record in the form of a certified result sheet. A certificate of passing the course was also produced before the commission at the time of the interview.

Justice Sibal added the counsel appearing for the commission had not disputed the genuineness or veracity of the result sheet showing the successful completion of course. He also did not deny that the petitioner had actually passed the course much before the cutoff date.

Referring to an apex court judgment Justice Sibal added: “In the light of the discussion and the law laid by the Supreme Court, the denial by the commission of two marks to the petitioner for him having successfully undergone the course is found to be unjust and thus unsustainable”.