Discrepancy in recruitment
Jaswanth Adapa
(Querist) 26 May 2018
This query is : Resolved
TSSPDCL has recently conducted exam for the Post of Junior Accounts Officer for 100 Marks (Part A for 80 marks and Part B for 20 Marks).
I have got 70 Marks (56 Marks in Part A and 14 Marks in Part B) and I was ranked 93rd. My Date of Birth is 22.05.1987
For the same 70 Marks, a Candidate whose Date of Birth is 30.07.1995 was given 69th Rank, becasue he scored better marks than me in Part A. (His scoring was Part A 62 marks and 8 Marks in Part B).
As per my understanding and time tested principle, which is usually adopted by UPSC/ TSPSC or any other Institiution in case of a Tie of Marks is that, The Person who is Older in Age is given better rank than Candidate whose is younger.
But in my case, first preference in ranking was given to that candidate who secured better marks in Part A , instead of Age being given first preference.
Had the Selection of Candidates been made on the Basis of Age (in case of equal marks), I would stand a chance to get Selected and find a place in the Selection List.
Even the Notification inviting application for the Job, never mentioned the fact that Weightage will be Given to Part A while ranking Students. Not even the Service Regulations of TSSPDCL speaks about Tie Breaking Principle.
Very recently I have got to know that the entire Selection Procedure (including Certification Verification, Executing Bond etc) has been completed by TSSPDCL and is in the process of issuing Appointment Letters in a day or two.
During these Vacations, my Case could not be accepted by the Telangana High Court, because Service Matters were not taken up by the Judge.
In View of the above Situation,
1. I would like to know my Legal Position.
2. What is the Settled Law Position with respect to giving priority to age over marks in Part A.
3. Do I stand a chance in getting/ winning this case and secure a seat in TSSPDCL.
4. Do I need to worry because the entire Selection Procedure will get over, by the time Courts Resume on 04.06.2018.
I am giving links to the following for reference, as i am unable to attach the same.
1. Notification: https://www.tssouthernpower.com/ShowProperty/CP_CM_REPO/Pages/Careers/Direct%20Recruitment%20to%20JAO
2. Merit List: https://www.tssouthernpower.com/ShowProperty/CP_CM_REPO/Pages/Careers/JAO%20Results%20Qualified
3. Service Regulations adopted by TSSPDCL: http://apsebea.org/files/APSEB%20Service%20Regulations%20final.pdf
Any help is highly Appreciated !!
Guest
(Expert) 26 May 2018
Merit or tie in core subject, as in Part A can be the criteria, not on general awareness pertaining to part B or the tie in aggregate marks.
Jaswanth Adapa
(Querist) 26 May 2018
Sir, if It can be a Criteria, they have never specified about the fact in the Notification, that weightage would be given to marks in Part A while ranking.
Moreover, in the past examinations conducted by TSSPDCL, where there was Part A and Part B for 80 marks and 20 marks respectively, better ranking was given to those persons who were older in age (when two or more candidates secured equal marks). Then why this sudden deviation from the Time Tested Principle ?
Further, even its Peer Electricity Companies like TSTRANSCO or TSGENCO or TSNPDCL, always ranked by giving preference to age first and then later to marks in Part A.
Even, the Tie Breaker Principle adopted by UPSC, gives due preference to Age first, and then marks in Compulsory Paper.
Guest
(Expert) 26 May 2018
Specified or not specified, the general criteria of selection is merit on the main subject. Even otherwise, Para XI of the DETAILED NOTIFICATION No.02/2018, Dt. 11.01.2018, clearly spells that "the decision of TS SPDCL in all aspects and all respects pertaining to the application and its acceptance or rejection as the case may be, conduct of examination and at all consequent stages culminating in the selection or otherwise of any candidate shall be final in all respects. TSSPDCL reserves its right to alter and modify terms and conditions laid down in the notification for conducting the various stages up to selection, duly intimating details thereof to all concerned, as warranted by any unforeseen circumstances arising during the course of this process, or as deemed necessary by TS SPDCL at any stage."
Jaswanth Adapa
(Querist) 26 May 2018
Sir, thanks for your valuable time. I would finally like to conclude by asking:-
"Specified or not specified, the general criteria of selection is merit on the main subject" --- Sir, If I may ask, is this based on any well settled law ?
Further as per Para XI, when they say that, TSSPDCL reserves its right to alter and modify terms and conditions laid down in the Notification for conducting various stages up to selection, duly intimating details thereof to all concerned, as warranted by any unforeseen circumstances arising during the course of this process, or as deemed necessary by TSSPDCL at any stage".................. TSSPDCL has never duly intimated details thereof to all concerned.
Guest
(Expert) 26 May 2018
What for you want confirmation, when your queries have been replied as per the prevailing Administrative rules and instructions?
But one thing seems to be certain. Your latest post asserting for some confirmation, clearly reveals as if it was some academic query, not your real problem. You are free to assume anything. For getting your case an example of settled law, you may have to file a case in the competent court, i.e., State's Administrative Tribunal, lose that first, then go for appeals and get verdict of the High Court or Supreme Court in your favour.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 26 May 2018
Mr. Jaswanth Adapa, I had replied to your similar query in the FORUM section as under:
Please appreciate. Though the selection is purely based on marks obtained, it is also further based on Roster Points of reservation.
Therefore, they have not ranked you at 93 based on marks in Part-A, or on the basis of Date of Birth, but purely on the basis of Roster Point. A close scrutiny of the table will reveal this.
Your grouse has no basis.
You may not succeed if you approach any court of law.
Jaswanth Adapa
(Querist) 26 May 2018
@Dhingra Sir,
This is not some sort of an Academic Query Sir.
I am really facing such a problem, and I have recently contacted a Lawyer too.
Over here I just wanted to check and understand with you Experts and see what rule of the law is.
@Ramachandran... Sir, thank you for responding. I have replied to your answer too in the earlier mentioned post as under:
Sir, Thank you for your prompt reply. I would like to mention here that my Challenge in the present case, is on the way Ranking is given in the Merit List.
Generally after the Merit List is given, a list is drawn based on Roster Community and Verification is called for.
But in my case, I believe that there is a discrepancy in the Ranking itself, by giving undue weightage on just Part A, when the exam was for 100 Marks in Aggregate.
Had the ranking been on the basis of Age (when two or more candidates secure equal marks), I would fall within that Roster Community and be eligible for Certificate Verification and appointment as well.
"Therefore, they have not ranked you at 93 based on marks in Part-A, or on the basis of Date of Birth, but purely on the basis of Roster Point. A close scrutiny of the table will reveal this." --- Sir, if you closely observe the Merit List ( I have given the link for the same), ranking was given purely on the basis of Total Marks obtained, and marks in Part A. On the basis of Merit List, a separate list is drawn inviting candidates for Certificate Verification based on Roster Community.
Sir, just in case, if you need more clarity on the above mentioned case, if you don't mind, please leave your number, to discuss the case in your FREE TIME ONLY.
Kind Regards
Guest
(Expert) 26 May 2018
Question of settled law arises only in academic queries. When you do not want to believe anyone, the only alternative for removal of your doubt left with you is to file a case in the competent court of law and get your doubt removed through the verdict of your case.
