NewKerala.com

Key Points

The Jharkhand High Court delivered a landmark verdict against bureaucratic inflexibility by directing the Public Service Commission to appoint Manoj Kachhap as an Assistant Professor. Despite a minor technical fee payment issue, Kachhap's exceptional academic performance and legal persistence ultimately prevailed. The court's decisive intervention highlighted the importance of merit over procedural technicalities. By imposing a significant fine, the judiciary sent a strong message about fair recruitment practices.

Key Points: Jharkhand HC Vindicates Manoj Kachhap Against JPSC Bias

  • High Court imposes Rs 1 lakh fine on JPSC for wrongful candidate rejection
  • Manoj Kachhap proved top performer despite initial disqualification
  • Court mandates appointment within four weeks
  • Technical fee payment error deemed insufficient grounds for exclusion
2 min read

Jharkhand HC slaps Rs 1 lakh fine on JPSC for denying appointment to meritorious candidate

High Court orders JPSC to appoint meritorious Manoj Kachhap after exposing unfair rejection due to technical fee payment error

"A technical glitch cannot be grounds to deny appointment to the most meritorious applicant - High Court Division Bench"

Ranchi, June 13

In a sharp rebuke to the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC), the High Court has imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh for wrongfully rejecting a qualified candidate’s application for the post of Assistant Professor.

A division bench headed by Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao dismissed JPSC’s appeal and upheld an earlier single-bench order directing the appointment of Manoj Kumar Kachhap.

The case stems from a 2018 recruitment drive for four posts of Assistant Professor in the Nagpuri language.

Kachhap had applied and scored 72.10 out of a possible 85 marks in the academic evaluation. However, his name did not appear in the list of candidates shortlisted for interviews.

Upon inquiry, Kachhap discovered that his application had been invalidated because the online examination fee he had paid did not reach the JPSC account due to a technical error. Crucially, his name was not mentioned in the official rejection list, leaving him unaware of the issue.

Challenging the exclusion, Kachhap filed a writ petition in the High Court. The single bench ordered that he be included in the interview process, noting that the final decision would hinge on the court's verdict. JPSC complied, and Kachhap appeared for the interview.

Although the final results were declared on December 23, 2021, one post remained unfilled in compliance with the court's interim directive. The court then asked JPSC to submit Kachhap’s interview marks in a sealed envelope. It was revealed that he had topped the entire selection process.

Taking serious note of the situation, the court directed JPSC to appoint him to the vacant post within four weeks.

It ruled that a technical glitch could not be grounds to deny appointment to the most meritorious applicant.

The bench also pointed out that many examinations exempt Scheduled Tribe (ST) candidates from paying fees, making JPSC’s rigid stance even less defensible.

JPSC appealed the single bench’s ruling, arguing that fee payment was mandatory and non-receipt disqualified a candidate automatically.

However, Kachhap’s counsel, Advocate Savyasachi, argued that his client had no way of knowing the transaction failure since he was not listed among the rejected candidates.

After considering submissions from both sides, the division bench upheld the single bench’s order and imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on JPSC.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rajesh P.
Finally some justice! Our government bodies need to be more accountable. How can they reject a topper for a technical error that wasn't even his fault? The 1 lakh fine is well deserved. Hope this sets an example for other commissions too. 👏
P
Priya M.
This case shows how our systems fail bright candidates. The poor man had to fight for 3+ years for what was rightfully his. The court's observation about ST fee exemption makes JPSC's stance look even worse - clearly they were being unnecessarily rigid.
A
Amit K.
While I'm happy for Mr. Kachhap, I wonder how many other deserving candidates get rejected due to such technicalities and don't have the resources to fight in court? Our recruitment systems need complete digital overhaul with proper confirmation mechanisms.
S
Sunita R.
The fact that he topped the selection process proves how flawed JPSC's initial decision was. Instead of wasting public money on appeals, they should have gracefully accepted their mistake. Taxpayers' money down the drain because of someone's ego!
V
Vikram S.
Respect to the judiciary for standing up for meritocracy. But Rs 1 lakh fine is peanuts for JPSC - should have been at least 10 lakhs to really make them feel it. These commissions need to understand they exist to serve candidates, not harass them.
N
Neha T.
As someone who has faced similar issues in government recruitment, I can relate to the mental trauma Mr. Kachhap must have gone through. The system needs more transparency - at least send rejection emails/SMS to all applicants with proper reasons!

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50