AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jagmohan Bansal, J
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of decision dated 16.03.2023 whereby he was rejected for the post of Information Technology Assistant (Software).
The petitioner pursuant to Advertisement No.5/2021 dated 17.08.2021 applied for the post of Information Technology Assistant (Software). He applied under reserved category and stood first in the written test in his category. He was supposed to possess minimum two years’ experience. The relevant clause of the Advertisement reads as:-
“5.3 Minimum Educational Qualifications & Experience:
Name of the Post
Educational Qualification
Experience
InformationTechnology Assistant (Software)
Bachelor’s degree in Computer Science, IT or Electronics and Communication with emphasis on Computer software and programming from a Central or State Government recognized or an AICTE approved University or Institution.
Minimum 02 years of relevant work experience in Central Government or State Government or Public Sector Undertaking or any e-Governance Project or in Private Sector”
The petitioner submitted experience certificate. As per certificate submitted by him, he worked for some time with an Advocate as Assistant and thereafter in a private undertaking as Digital Marketing Executive. The respondent rejected his experience with Advocate and further found that he has less than two years’ experience as Digital Marketing Executive.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the Advertisement, no cut-off date for experience certificate was prescribed, thus, experience upto the date of interview/scrutiny of documents must be considered.
From the perusal of Advertisement, it is evident that opening date of the Advertisement was 17.08.2021 and closing date was 07.10.2021. As per Advertisement, candidate must have attained educational qualification on or before the closing date for submission of application for recruitment. In the absence of specific cut-off date for experience, last date for filing application at the most can be considered as relevant date. Experience beyond said date in the absence of specific provision in the Advertisement or Rules governing the post cannot be considered. The petitioner was having less than two years’ experience by closing date of the Advertisement. This Court has no jurisdiction to extend relevant date for experience.
In the wake of above discussion and findings, this Court is of the considered opinion that petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.