In a recent legal case, the court delved into the complex issue of the validity of provisional results in educational qualification criteria, leading to a significant legal analysis. The court’s decision has wide-reaching implications on the interpretation of such criteria in similar cases. Let’s explore the key takeaways from this insightful legal analysis.
Facts
- The advertisement issued by the appellant specified that candidates applying for the post of Post-Graduate Teachers must have passed B.Ed. on the date of application submission.
- Private respondents had appeared for the B.Ed examination and received provisional/confidential results from their respective Universities before the cut-off date of 12.10.2015.
- The private respondents applied for the post based on the provisional/confidential results provided to them, meeting the requirement set by the advertisement.
- The appellant rejected the candidature of private respondents solely on the ground that their results were not officially declared by the Universities before the application deadline.
- Respondents filed writ petitions challenging the order of rejection from the advertisement dated 28.06.2015
- The writ petitions were allowed by the learned Single Judge
- The decision of the Single Judge was affirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court
- The appellant/Commission filed intra court appeals against the decisions
Also Read: Court’s Jurisdiction in Re-appraising Arbitrator’s Findings
Issue
- The issue raised is the validity of provisional/confidential results declared by Universities.
- The question pertains to whether these results can be considered as valid declarations.
Also Read: Contrary Directions in Issuance of Letter of Intent
Arguments
- Mr. Maninder Singh pointed out that the High Court directed the appellant to amend its Rules regarding the date of eligibility.
- Mr. Maninder Singh, learned senior counsel, represented the appellant.
- Mr. P.S. Patwalia, along with Ms. Garima Bajaj, represented the contesting respondents or original writ petitioners.
- The record was thoroughly examined by the court.
Also Read: Application for Stay in Civil Suit Rejected: Court’s Legal Analysis
Analysis
- High Court’s view on not interfering with the order of appeals
- Confirmation of authenticity of provisional/confidential results by Universities
- Justification of High Court’s decision based on confirmed results
- Candidates’ qualification based on results before cut off date
- Timely submission of applications with provisional/confidential results
- High Court directed Haryana Staff Selection Commission to consider eligibility of educational qualification at the time of Screening or interview
- High Court’s directions were deemed unnecessary by the appellate court
- Appellate court quashed the directions issued by the High Court
Decision
- Respondents not entitled to any salary for the period not worked
- Entitled for due seniority with increment notionally from date of appointment of other candidates
- 90 posts to be offered to 74 private respondents and 16 intervenors within four weeks
- Appointments to be made without delay after verification
- Seniority of 90 candidates based on inter se merit among them
- Appeals dismissed, pending intervention applications disposed of
Case Title: HARYANA STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION Vs. PRIYANKA (2021 INSC 436)
Case Number: C.A. No.-005065-005095 / 2021
