Santosh Kumar Shah. vs Insurance Regulatory And Development Authority And Others.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

"(i) That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order of direction in an appropriate nature to the respondents for allowing/permitting him to appear in interview going on for recruitment of Appentice Development Officer in Urban Central Zone.

(ii) That, the respondents be further directed that in case of completion of Interview for the said post, they further conduct the same for petitioner, as on being him required to appear for interview by the letter of respondents itself.

(iii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may kindly be passed."

The case of the petitioner is that he is presently working as a Life Insurance Company (LIC) Agent and had participated in the recruitment drive termed as Apprentice Development Officer Recruitment, 2019 issued by the respondent No.2/Zonal Officer/Manager, LIC, Bhopal. According to the petitioner, he having possessed all the requisite qualifications participated in the examination which took place on 11.8.2019 and he was also declared as successful in the Online Test and was required to appear for interview vide letter dated 16.10.2019. The further case of the petitioner is that despite he qualified for the said post, he was not called for interview and for which no reasons have been assigned by the respondents. The contention of the petitioner is that when he approached the respondents he was orally denied to participate in the interview.

A reply to the writ petition has also been filed by the respondents/LIC refuting the allegations made by the petitioner. The respondents have also relied upon the Annexure P-5, which is an E-mail issued by the respondents to the petitioner directing him to appear for the interview. It is also stated by the respondents that vide a registered letter dated 21.10.2019 the petitioner was also informed to appear in the interview on 2.11.2019 at 2:30 PM. The aforesaid letter is also placed on record as Annexure R-2. It is also submitted that the petitioner was informed through "SMS Module" as well i.e. by issuance of message to the petitioner, the micro delivery report has also been placed on record. In the aforesaid delivery report it is mentioned that SMS/ message was received by the petitioner on 23.10.2019 at 16:58:33 PM. It is further stated that as required, the petitioner had also appeared in the interview and had signed the attendance sheet, which is also placed on record as Annexure R-7. It is further stated by the respondents that at the time of scrutiny of the documents prior to interview it was found that the petitioner did not fulfill the business requirement under the "agent category" as prescribed in the advertisement/employment notice issued by the LIC for the post of Appentice Development Officer, hence his candidature was rejected at the threshold only without taking his interview.

Learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently argued that the petition is misconceived, as the petitioner has come up with a grievance that he was not even called for the interview, whereas the respondents have placed various documents on record to demonstrate that the petitioner was indeed called for interview and had also appeared for the same but as he was not found fit for the job after screening of his documents and hence he was not interviewed by the respondents as it was of no avail.

Shri Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondents has also drawn the attention of this Court to the letter dated 2.11.2019 (Annexure R-2) issued by the respondents in which it has been clearly stipulated that before coming for the interview a candidate is required to ensure that he is eligible according to the eligibility criteria as stipulated in the advertisement notification and if he is not found to be eligible for the post, his candidature will be cancelled at any stage of the recruitment. In the aforesaid letter it is also mentioned that even if a candidate is qualified in the written examination and subsequently it is found that he does not fulfilled the eligibility criteria, his candidature will be cancelled and he will not be interviewed. Thus learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner has not challenged the rejection of his candidature as according to the respondents he was not entitled to participate in the interview as he did not fulfill the eligibility criteria as provided in the advertisement issued in this behalf, specially, the required experience in respect of agent category for recruitment in urban areas.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

From the record this Court finds that the petitioner's grievance is that was not called for the interview despite having passed through the written examination. Admittedly, the petitioner has not challenged the rejection of his candidature which was on account of his not complying with the eligibility criteria as provided in the advertisement. The petitioner's grievance is that he was not called for the interview, which is also not correct, as the respondents have filed various documents to demonstrate that the petitioner was given a prior notice to appear for interview. In the letter dated 21.10.2019, itself it is clearly provided as under:-

"Re: Recruitment of Apprentice Development Officers.

With reference to the above, we are glad to inform you that you have come out successful in the written test held on 11.8.2019/22.9.2019 and you are now requested to appear before the Selection Committee for an interview on 02.11.2019 at 02:30 PM at LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, "JEEVAN PRAKASH", MADAN MAHAL, NAGPUR ROAD, JABALPUR (M.P.).

Before coming for the interview, please ensure that you are eligible according the eligibility criteria stipulated in the advertisement notification, If you are not eligible, your candidature will be cancelled at any stage of the recruitment. Please note that even if you have qualified in the written examination and subsequently it is found that you do not fulfill the eligibility criteria, your candidature will be cancelled and you will not be allowed to appear for the interview ............................"

(emphasis supplied)

A perusal of the aforesaid letter clearly reveals that the respondents  were  under  no  obligation  to  conduct  the interview of each and every candidate, who has passed the written examination. It is not the petitioner's case that he is eligible in all respects as provided in the advertisement and despite this, he has not been called for the interview, as the petitioner's  contention  is  that  was  not  called  for  the interview  at  all.  It  is  also  found  that  in  rebuttal,  the petitioner has not filed any rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondent LIC.

In view of the aforesaid discussion this Court is of the considered opinion that no case for interference is made out. Accordingly, the petition being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed. No costs.