AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1969
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....view and further directed the respondent No.2 - Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC) to keep the result of interview of the petitioners in sealed cover, to be produced before this Court. Thereafter on 01st May, 2018, learned advocate for GPSC produced sealed cover. On the basis thereof, the Court noted that as per the result produced by opening of the sealed cover, petitioner No.1 - Parvatikumari Rameshbhai and petitioner No.2 - Viradiya Bhaveshkumar Govindbhai had not secured the requisite marks so as to position themselves in the merit list for final selection. 2.2 The petitioner No.3 - Rajapara Savan Jagdishbhai secured the marks, which enabled him to get position in the merit-list for final selection. The Court, by order dated 01st May, 2018, dismissed the petition in respect of petitioner Nos.1 and 2. Accordingly, the present petition survived only for petitioner No.3. In the said order dated 01st May, 2018, it was further observed that the appointment, if any, shall be subject to further orders of the Court. 3. Noticing the relevant facts, respondent No.2 - Gujarat Public Service Commission issued advertisement No.37/2016-17 for the recruitment to the posts of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner made representation stating that the S.S.C.E. credit certificate was already sent with application along with other documents. The petitioner said that it was entirely possible that the same was misplaced in the office of respondent No.2 - GPSC, and stated that since it was actually sent. The petitioner produced attested copy of the certificate and requested the respondent No.2 to treat him eligible. 3.5 This Court granted ad-interim relief by way of order passed in Civil Application directing that the petitioner shall be called in interview, but requiring the result of the interview of the petitioner to be produced before the Court. As noted hereinabove, out of the three petitioners, two petitioners failed in the interview and the petition survived only for petitioner No.3. 4. Heard learned senior advocate Mr.Anshin Desai assisted by learned advocate Mr.Manish Shah for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.K.M. Antani for respondent No.1 - State and learned advocate Mr.Manish J. Patel for respondent No.2 - Gujarat Public Service Commission. 4.1 It was asserted on behalf of the petitioner that the S.S.C.E. certificate was actually sent along with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndment notice dated 08th May, 2018 whereby the candidates who were declared ineligible after the examination of the documents and certificate for the post of Class-I, their evidences were considered and they were declared eligible. It was further averred undeniably that these candidates who appeared in Class-I examination were granted opportunity to produce S.S.C.E. certificates. It was submitted that even if going by the stand of the respondent that the petitioner had not sent the certificate, the petitioner ought to have been granted the opportunity to make good the requirement, instead of adopting a technical and discriminatory stance. 5. The arena of facts and the rival case, leads to suggest that the case of the respondents that S.S.C.E. certificate was not sent by the petitioner, was beset with a serious dispute. It was the specific case of the petitioner that through R.P.A.D. post, while sending the application, the S.S.C.E. credit certificate was sent along with the other documents. Respondent No.2 took a stance that the same was not received and treated the petitioner to be ineligible for the purpose of interview, after permitting the petitioner to participate in the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it in an unreasonable time or improper manner. In Law Lexicon by R. Ramanatha Aiyar, 1997 Edition, irregularity is defined as "a neglect of order or method; not according to regulations; the doing of an act at an unreasonable time, or in an improper manner; the technical term for every defect in practical proceedings or the mode of conducting an action or defence, as distinguished from defects in pleading. Irregularity is failure to observe that particular course of proceedings which, conformable with the practice of the court, ought to have been observed". 5.3 A thing irregularly done is not regularly done. It is not in conformity of rule or principle. The concepts "illegal", "irregular" and "procedurally irregular", are often understood in terms of their degree which they bear to be not in conformity with rule of particular course of action. The illegality is a highest kind of breach of law which will taint and vitiate the action. One who commit "illegality" has to be denied the assertion of his right and he stands disentitled to relief in law. Irregularity, as noticed, is breach of procedure of rule or some orderly conduct but not of such nature which could be said to be in t....