[ 1947 ]

Registered with the Registrar

of Newspapers for India under

No. 10410



La Gazette de L' État de Poudouchéry

The Gazette of Puducherry

PART - I



EXTRAORDINAIRE

EXTRAORDINARY



Publiée par

Published by



Autorité

Authority

` 3-00

Prix : ` 3-00

Price : ` 3-00

Registered No. PY/44/2018-20

WPP No. TN/PMG(CCR)/WPP-88/2018-20

Dated : 14-8-2019

Price : ` 3-00







2019 }

|

14 {

No.

135

Poudouchéry

Mercredi

Août

2019 (23 Sravana 1941)

No.

Puducherry

Wednesday

14th

August

2019

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS

(PERSONNEL WING)

No. A.34012/2/2006-DP&AR(Exam.).

Puducherry, the 6th August 2019.

NOTIFICATION

The Examination Cell of the Department of Personnel and Administrative

Reforms had conducted the Limited Departmental Examination for promotion to ten

posts of Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (ACTO) on 26-11-2006 based on the

request, dated 25-04-2006 received from the Commercial Taxes Department,

Puducherry and the results were declared vide Notification No. A.34012/2/2006-

DP&AR (Exam.), dated 04-12-2006.

2. The question paper contained 100 objective type questions each carrying

one mark. When it was brought to the notice of the Department of Personnel and

Administrative Reforms that questions from 91-100 were set out of the syllabus

prescribed in the call letter sent to the candidates on 06-11-2006, a conscious

decision was taken to award grace marks for the said ten out of syllabus questions

1948

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[ PART-I

1948

asked on Central Sales Tax Act,1956 and 10 marks were awarded to all candidates

as grace marks ignoring the actual marks, if any, scored by the candidates out of

the said ten questions. The merit list was drawn accordingly and the results were

declared.

3. Aggrieved by the evaluation answers with grace marks awarded as

above, R. Gunasekaran and two others filed O.A.No. 961/2006 and R. Vassandhan

and another filed, O.A.No.965/2006 before the Hon’ble Central Administrative

Tribunal (CAT) seeking the following relief:

(i) “To call for the records of the Department of Personnel and

Administrative Reforms, Pondicherry, who passed the order, dated

04-12-2006 relating to the publication of results of the Limited Departmental

Competitive Examination for promotion by direct recruitment to the post

of Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer which was held on 26-11-2006 in so

far as the general category is concerned and set aside the same,

consequently,

(ii) Direct the official respondents to select the candidates for promotion

by direct recruitment to the abovesaid posts considering the applicants

also only on the basis of the marks obtained in the Limited Departmental

Examination which was held on 26-11-2006”.

4. The Hon’ble CAT disposed of the OAs by a common order, dated

17-04-2009 with the following direction:

“As such we quash and set aside the impugned notification, dated

04-12-2006 and direct the respondents to conduct a fresh examination as

per Recruitment Rules and select the candidates on merit. Accordingly,

the OAs are disposed of with the above direction”.

5. The Government preferred an appeal against the abovesaid orders

of the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in W.P.No. 24085/2010

before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature, Madras. Some other selected

candidates also preferred appeals and filed Writ Petitions before the High Court.

All the Writ Petitions were dismissed on 04-12-2012 by the High Court by confirming

the CAT Orders, dated 17-04-2009.

6. The Government filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in SLP (C) 13712-13713/2013 which were also dismissed by

the Supreme Court on 18-04-2013.

7. Thereafter, the Government filed a Review Application in R.A

No.104 of 2017 in W.P.No. 24085/2010 pointing out certain infirmities in the

Hon’ble High Court Orders, dated 04-12-2012. The Hon’ble High Court allowed the

Review Application on 30-06-2017 with the following direction.

“We confirm the order passed by the Tribunal, setting aside the select

list prepared by giving grace marks to all the candidates. We set aside the

direction to conduct fresh examination in accordance with the recruitment

rules for selection of Assistant Commercial Tax Officer. We grant the

consequential relief claimed by the respondents in the Original Applications

by directing the Government of Puducherry to redraw and publish the

PART-I ]

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

1949

select list strictly on the basis of the marks obtained by the candidates in

the Limited Departmental Examination held on 26th November 2006. Such

exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of

receipt of this order”.

8. The Government again preferred a Modification Petition in W.M.P 8700/18

in R.A No. 104/2017 before the Hon’ble High Court which was disposed of by the

Hon’ble High Court with the following direction on 03-07-2019:

“We direct the Chief Secretary to Government of Puducherry to ensure

that the order passed by this Court, dated 30-06-2017 in Review

Application Nos. 126 to 130 of 2013 and 104 and 105 of 2017 is complied

with in its letter and spirit as expeditiously as possible and in any case,

on or before 5th August 2019. The Chief Secretary shall file a report of

compliance before this Court on 7th August 2019”.

9. The considered views of the Government Pleader and the opinion of

the Law Department have been taken. The decision to award grace marks was

taken based on the fact that 10 questions were set out of the syllabus prescribed

in the recruitment notification. Nobody, including the aggrieved applicants in

Original Applications, disputed this fact. However, the grace marks awarded failed

to stand judicial scrutiny and consequently the merit list with grace marks stood

quashed. In as much as it has been admitted by the Government that ten questions

were out of syllabus, the natural corollary would be to restrict the evaluation to

the portion covered by the notified syllabus so as to ensure level play for all the

contesting candidates.

10. The Hon’ble High Court while disposing W.M.P 8700/18 in R.A No.104/

2017 has made the following observation in para 8 of the judgment. Neither the

candidates who are the petitioners in W.M.P No. 34922 of 2017 nor the Union

territory of Puducherry, petitioner in W.M.P No. 8700 and 8701 of 2018 are in any

way affected by the order passed by this Court. We do not understand as to why

the Union territory of Puducherry has filed the Modification Petitions, in spite of

making the position clear by this Court earlier that it is open to the Government to

redraw and publish the select list strictly on the basis of the marks obtained by

the candidates in the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination held on

26th November 2006.

11. In view of the aforesaid background and particularly the orders, dated

30-06-2017 in Review Application No. 104 of 2017 as well as the orders, dated

03-07-2019 in W.M.P No. 8700/18 in R.A No.104/2017 of the High Court, the grace

marks given are excluded and the evaluation has been done with reference to all the

questions except the questions 91-100 which were found to be related to Central Sales

Tax Act, 1956 which was not part of the syllabus as decided earlier by the

Department. The net effect of the exercise is that the list of selected candidates is

enclosed and is essentially the same as it was notified earlier on 04-12-2006.

(By order of the Chief Secretary)

V. JAISANKAR,

Under Secretary to Government (DP&AR).

1950

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[ PART-I

1950

ANNEXURE

Sl.

Name and address of the officials