SEC., U.P.S.C. AND ANR. versus S. KRISHNA CHAITANYA

Citation: [2011] 9 S.C.R. 842 · Decided: 05-08-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, ANIL R. DAVE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 9 S.C.R. 842 
A 
SEC., U.P.S.C. AND ANR. 
v. 
S. KRISHNA CHAITANYA 
(Civil Appeal No. 6349 of 2011) 
AUGUST 05, 2011 
< 
B 
[DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND 
ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.] 
Education/Educational institutions: Civil Service 
c Examination - Plea of respondent-candidate that he sent 
application/examination form through courier but did not 
receive admission letter - The candidate could not produce 
the acknowledgment card stamped by the institution to show 
the receipt of application form - High Court passed interim 
''· 
D order directing institution to allow student to appear in 
examination - On appeal, held: The candidate could not show 
any evidence that he had sent the application form - The 
appellants cannot be directed to declare the final result of the 
respondent, especially when his application form had not 
E been received by the appellants within the period prescribed 
- The candidate not only took the preliminary examination 
but also took the main examination and also appeared for the 
interview by virtue of interim orders though he had no right to 
take any of the examinations - Grant of such interim orders 
F should have been avoided as they not only increase work of 
the institution which conducts examination but also give false 
hope to the candidates approaching the court - However, very 
often courts are becoming more sympathetic to the students 
and by interim orders authorities are directed to permit the 
G students to take an examination without ascertaining whether 
... 
the concerned candidate had a right to take the examination 
- For any special reason in an exceptional case, if such a 
direction is given, the court must dispose of the case finally 
on merits before declaration of the result - Interim order. 
• !-I 
842 
,> 
SEC., U.P.S.C. AND ANR. v. S. KRISHNA CHAITANYA 843 
Interim order: Scope of - Held: Interim order should not A 
be of such a nature that by virtue of which a petition or an 
application, as the case may be, is finally allowed or granted 
even at an interim stage - Normally, at an interlocutory stage 
no such relief should be granted that by virtue of which the 
final relief, which is asked for and is available at the disposal 
B 
of the matter is granted 
The case of the respondent was that he sent 
application for taking Civil Services Examination, 2010 to 
UPSC through DTDC Courier. He handed over the 
application form to the said Courier company on 28th 
C 
January, 2010. The Courier company informed to him that 
the application form was delivered to UPSC on 29th 
January, 2010. On 20th April 2010, the respondent made 
a representation to the appellant with regard to non-
issuance of admission certificate to him and the D 
appellants informed him that his application was not 
received by, them and asked .him to furnish 
acknowledgement card duly stamped by UPSC to enable 
the appellants to take further action in the matter. The 
respondent had not received any acknowledgement card 
E 
from the appellants. He filed original application (OA) 
before the Central Administrative Tribunal. By interim 
order, the Tribunal asked the respondent to submit a 
copy of his application form to the appellants and also 
directed the appellants to issue an admission certificate 
F 
to the respondent so as to enable him to take the 
Preliminary examination. The issuance of admission 
certificate was subjected to the final result of the OA. Both 
appellants and respondent complied with the interim 
order. The OA was finally allowed and the appellants G 
were directed to declare the result. The appellants 
challenged the order of the Tribunal before the High 
Court. The High Court disposed of the petition by 
observing that the respondent should be permitted to 
take the Civil Services Examination (Mains) and should 
H 
844 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 9 S.C.R. 
A also be permitted to appear before the interview, if he 
qualified in the Mains. During the pendency of the 
proceedings, the respondent took the Examinations and 
also appeared for the oral interview. The final result was 
not declared and it was retained by the appellants in 
B sealed cover. 
The instant appeal was filed challenging the order of 
the High Court. The respondent filed interim application 
for directions to the appellants to declare the result of the 
respondent and keep a post vacant in a particular cadre 
C so as to enable him to join the service. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The resp

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.