Rani Kumari vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Others

This letters patent appeal has been filed against an order dated 5.12.2003 on CWJC. No. 8079 of 2003 Rani Kumari v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Ors. This is a matter in which for the direct recruitment of Junior Telecom Officer a competitive examination was held on 4.3.2001. The Petitioner-Appellant apparently had been declared successful in the examination itself but she did not possess the basic qualification which she acquired subsequently. On these facts, there is no issue. The contention is that the Petitioner-Appellant had acquired the qualification subsequently.

The issue has to be seen plainly as this is not a matter where equity can be adjusted. On what exactly is the qualification which must be possessed by a candidate on the day when the application form'' is to be submitted on or before a certain date. In respect to the present case the date as was announced in the recruitment was of Graduate Engineer Junior Telecom Officer 2001. The date was 1 January, 2001 in Clause - 9. The advertisement in Clause-3 mentions the eligibility by stating that the Applicant must possess Bachelor of Engineering/Bachelor of Technology or equivalent degree from a recognized Engineering College/University in the disciplines named in the advertisement.

From the record which the court has seen of the writ petition or of the letters patent appeal, the court is avoiding a circumstance whether the candidate may have suppressed the facts. There seems to be a shade of it.

The fact of the matter is that the Petitioner, did receive a communication and she said so in her own record of the writ petition that she was required to submit an engineering certificate, a qualification which was to be possessed on or before 1.1.2001. This is the communication No. BR/3/2271 dated 3/5.11.2001. On this date, the Petitioner-Appellant did not possess the qualification. She received reminders from the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited but she did not respond to them as at that time she was not possessed of the qualification. Even the last of the communication which was received by her which she places on record being communication No. G-963 (Annexure-7) dated 16 September, 2002 she did not have this qualification. These communications were reiteration of the cut off date that this qualification must be possessed on or before a certain date which date was the date 1.1.2001.

The fact of the matter is that if this qualification was not possessed by the candidate when she was filling in the form in pursuance of the advertisement plainly she could not have applied. The rest is irrelevant.

The court is not inclined to interfere with the order on the writ petition.

Dismissed.