VIJENDRA KUMAR VERMA versus PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTARAKHAND AND ORS.

Citation: [2010] 12 S.C.R. 944 · Decided: 08-10-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 944 
VIJENDRA KUMAR VERMA 
V. 
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTARAKHAND AND 
ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 8861 of 2010) 
OCTOBER 8, 2010 
[DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND ANIL 
R. DAVE, JJ.j 
C 
Service Law - Selection - Uttaranchal Judicial Service 
Rules, 2005 - Rule 8 - Selection of Civil Judge - Eligibility 
criteria - Candidate declared successful in written competitive 
examination; called for interview, but finally not selected on 
the ground that he did not fulfill the eligibility criteria of basic 
o knowledge of computer operation -
Candidate filed writ 
petition contending that the said eligibility criteria was 
introduced during the midstream of the selection process, 
therefore, such process was vitiated - Writ petition dismissed 
- Justification of - Held: Justified - The eligibility criteria of_ 
E 
basic knowledge of computer operation is prescribed in Rufe 
8 itself -
The evidence on record makes it clear that no 
minimum benchmark or a new procedure was ever introduced 
during the midstream of the selection process -
Alf 
candidates including the appellant knew the requirements of 
F 
the selection process and were also fully aware that they must 
possess the basic knowledge of computer operation -
Appellant appeared in the interview and faced questions from 
computer expert without any protest at any stage - He cannot 
now turn back to state that the procedure adopted was wrong 
G and without jurisdiction - Judicial Service. 
H 
Judiciary - £-governance - New Judges are expected to 
have basic knowledge of the computer operation. 
An 
advertisement 
was 
published 
inviting 
944 
VIJENDRA KUMAR VERMA v. PUB. SERVICE COMMISSION, 945 
UTIARAKHAND . · 
applications from eligible candidates for selection of Civil 
A 
Judges (Junior Division) in the Uttaranchal Judicial 
Service. The appellant, a candidate, was declared 
successful in the written ,competitive examination, 
whereafter he was called for interview. At the time of 
interview, a computer expert ascertained the appellant's 
B 
basic knowledge of computer operation by putting 
questions to him and thereafter gave the opinion that a 
few he did not possess such basic knowledge. 
The respondents finally did not select the appellant 
C 
on the ground that he lacked in basic knowledge of 
computer operation, which was one of the eligibility 
criteria for being selected for the post of Civil Judge. 
The appellant filed a writ petition contending that the 
criteria ,of basic knowledge of computer operation was 
D 
introduced during midstream of the selection and, 
therefore, the selection process was vitiated; and, 
therefore, he should be inducted into service. The writ 
petition was dismissed by the High Court. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:1.1. The requirement and the necessity for 
having basic knowledge of computer operation as one 
of the ·eligibility criteria and conditions for selection is 
prescribed in Rule 8 itself of the Uttaranchal Judicial 
Service Rules, 2005. The advertisement also made it clear 
to all the intending candidates that they must have basic 
knowledge of computer operation. [Para 24] [954-E-F] 
E 
F 
1.2. When the list of successful candidates in the 
G 
written examination was published, it was also made 
clear that the knowledge of the candidates with regard 
to basic knowledge of computer operation would be 
tested at the time of interview, for which knowledge of 
H 
946 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 
A Microsoft Operating System and Microsoft Office 
Operation would be essential. In the call letter also (which 
was sent to the appellant at the time of calling him for 
interview), the aforesaid criteria was reiterated and spelt 
out. Therefore, no minimum benchmark or a new 
B procedure was ever introduced during the midstream of 
the selection process. All the candidates knew the 
requirements of the selection process and were also fully 
aware that they must possess the basic knowledge of 
computer operation meaning thereby Microsoft Operating 
c System and Microsoft Office Operation. Knowing the said 
criteria, the appellant appeared in the interview, faced the 
questions from the expert of computer application and 
took a chance and opportunity without any protest at any 
stage, and now he cannot turn back to state that the 
0 aforesaid procedure adopted was wrong and without 
jurisdiction. [Para 25) [954-F-H; 955-A-C] 
K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. (2008) 
3 SCC 512

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