Chandigarh August 5:
Apparently on a collision course with the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the Punjab Public Service Commission this afternoon refused to issue roll numbers to 243 candidates for PCS (Judicial) examination on “ultra technical” grounds -- a decision reversed by a Division Bench later in the day.
Concerned over the fate of aspirants, Chief Justice Mukul Mudgal and Justice Ajay Tewari took up the matter on the judicial side after the regular court working hours for directing PPSC secretary “to immediately issue roll numbers”. The genesis of the controversy lies in the failure of some candidates to submit detailed marks certificate of matriculation examination as a proof of passing Punjabi; and submission of additional Rs 25 as cost for downloaded forms.
The “selection committee” of Justice Satish Kumar Mittal, Justice Ranjit Singh and Justice Mahesh Grover, sometimes back received a representation from a candidate. His candidature was cancelled “only on the ground that he had not deposited Rs 25, prerequisite cost for downloading the examination form, even though he had deposited the examination fee of Rs 2,000”. In all, there were 108 such candidates.
The committee found the requirement was not clearly specified, and communicated the decision to consider them eligible to the PPSC secretary. Subsequently, on another representation, the committee decided to allow applicants to collect roll numbers on producing detailed marks certificate to show that they had cleared Punjabi. But at about 1 pm, the committee was informed of the PPSC’s refusal to entertain the claims. PPSC Chairman Sanjit Sinha was telephonically contacted after the committee held an emergent meeting.
“The commission chairman apprised the committee that he did not consider the committee’s decision as binding upon him and flatly refused to entertain the claims….” Taking up the minutes of the meeting, the Bench asserted these “disclose a disturbing state of affairs with regard to the rejection of candidates to important post of PCS (Judicial), which are being rejected on untenable grounds such as mark sheets not annexed and non-payment of Rs 25…
“It appears that the PPSC chairman has not acceded to the requirements of the communication of the committee and it is told to have asserted the power vests with the PPSC. We at this juncture are not concerned with the assertion of the PPSC, but with the future of the aspirants for judicial posts, the examination for which is scheduled on August 8…. 243 candidates are being denied a right to appear on what appears to be ultra technical and untenable stance”. The Bench directed Patiala additional district judge (I), along with all authorities of Punjab and PPSC to ensure “full compliance”.