Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

370
On the other hand, the contention of Mr. Z.A. Shah, learned counsel for selected candidates is that
pursuant to the order of Division Bench, which acquired finality after the withdrawal of application for
seeking permission to file Special Leave Petition from the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the short-listed
candidates on the basis of Preliminary Examination were allowed to appear in the Main Examination
during the pendency of these writ petitions. He further submits that the list of successful candidates
has also been published, whereas for making the final selection only interviews are to be held by the
Commission. It is also an undisputed fact that the validity of Main Examination and consequent
selection of the candidates is not under challenge, either in the present petitions or in any independent
petition, therefore, ends of justice and equity would be better served if in the event of petitioners’
success in the writ petitions, they are also directed to be examined in a fresh Main Examination to be
conducted by the Commission and, thereafter, fresh merit is drawn of all the candidates, who have
already qualified and who may qualify in the fresh Main Examination. Mr. Shah submits that the
interest of petitioners, which already stands protected by the order of learned Division Bench, would
continue to be protected in the above manner.
Jammu & Kashmir PSC
The dispute in these writ petitions relates to the Preliminary Examination only for short-listing the
number of candidates for the Main Examination. The final selection of a candidate for appointment
depends upon his comparative merit obtained in the Main Examination and in the interview to be held.
Undisputedly, the marks obtained by the candidates in the Preliminary Examination can be counted
only for short-listing and not for making final selection for their appointments. This being the position,
the principal and fundamental grievance of the writ petitions and the candidates, who were in identical
position, can only be that they have been denied the eligibility to appear in the Main Examination by
not judging their merit rightly and properly. Had they been selected by short-listing, they would have
only acquired the eligibility to appear in the Main Examination. It is also a fact which cannot be
disputed on any valid reason that all the candidates, who have been short-listed, have not appeared in
the same optional subject papers, which were having deficiencies, but many of them had appeared in
the optional subject-papers which were not having any discrepancy at all. Therefore, the Preliminary
Examination, as it relates to those optional subject-papers in which there was no discrepancy at all,
cannot be faulted with. It is only the examination of those candidates who appeared in 13 optional
subject papers, which were having discrepancies in the questions, is under challenge. In case the
Preliminary Examination of candidates, who appeared in the said optional papers having discrepancies,
is cancelled and fresh examination is held, their merit position would have to be readjusted in relation