Dr. Ritesh Kumar Tarun vs State Of Bihar
- Neutral2018 INSC 855
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a selection interview board denies marks for a qualification on the ground that the candidate did not produce a certificate of that qualification at the time of the interview, but the candidate has instead produced a mark sheet containing an endorsement confirming passage of that qualification, the board must grant the marks allotted for that qualification, as sufficient evidence of having obtained the qualification has thereby been produced.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 9869 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 17152 OF 2017]
DR. RITESH KUMAR TARUN Appellant (s)
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant was denied the benefit of 10 marks
on the ground that he did not produce the certificate
of having passed the Diploma in Orthopaedics at the
time of Interview. But according to the appellant,
he had produced the Mark Sheet, which is also annexed
as Annexure P2 before this Court, which contains the
endorsement that he had passed the Diploma in
Orthopaedics.
3. In our view, before the Interview Board,
sufficient evidence having been produced of having Signature Not Verified
passed the Diploma, the appellant should have been Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2018.10.06 12:35:06 IST Reason:
granted the allotted 10 marks in that regard. 2
4. In the above circumstances, this appeal is
allowed as follows :-
(i) The appellant shall produce the original Diploma
before the respondent – Commission within two weeks
from today, based on which, the Commission shall
reassess the appellant and forward its recommendation
to the Government within another two weeks.
(ii) The State Government is directed to take further
action in terms of the recommendations within two
weeks thereafter.
.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J. [ SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ]
New Delhi;
September 24, 2018.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free