Bombay High Court
Sandip Ambadas Kale vs The Union Of India And Another on 15 June, 2017
Bench: Anoop V. Mohta
1 wp 5126.17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 5126 OF 2017
Sandip S/o Ambadas Kale,
Age : 31 Years, Occu. : Govt. Service,
R/o Plot No. 33, Ganesh Nagar,
Bidkin, Tal. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. .. Petitioner
Versus
1) Union of India,
(Copy to be served on Assistant
Solicitor General, High Court
of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad).
2) Union Public Service Commission,
Dholpur House, Shahajahan Road,
New Delhi - 110 069. .. Respondents
Shri Jiwan J. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Deepali Jape, Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and
2.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND
SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.
DATE : 15TH JUNE, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT ( Per Anoop V. Mohta, J.) :-
. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Petition is heard
finally with consent of learned counsel for the parties.
02. Petition is based upon an advertisement dated 22.02.2017
2 wp 5126.17
calling applications from aspirant candidates for various civil
services. The last date for filling application form was 17.3.2017
till 18-00 hours. As per the instructions to candidates applying
for Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination for filling on-line
applications, they should use the website
http://www.upsconline.nic.in.
03. We have also noted that Part - II of registration consists of
three steps'. Step - I is filling of payment details. Step - II is
selection of examination centre and Step - III is uploading of
photograph and signature. There can not be any issue that the
candidate is required to complete the form within time, provide
details and make payment as required. There are various steps
required to be completed with details so asked including
uploading of jpg format photograph, signature and consent to
the declaration, apart from prescribed payment of fee within
time.
04. There is no issue, in view of the reply filed by contesting
respondent no.2, that petitioner completed payment of fee at
about 17-12 hours. However, petitioner did not complete Part -
II of application as he failed to upload his photograph, signature
and consent to the declaration. That resulted into, as stated,
submission of incomplete application for examination in time.
3 wp 5126.17
05. Petitioner has specifically averred that at about 15-20
p.m., on the date of application, he was trying to upload jpg
format of photograph and signature, but the site did not
respond. The site was completely hanged and after 6-00 p.m.,
there was no response from site, as time was over.
06. The petitioner therefore, immediately at about 6.24 p.m.
addressed an e-mail to UPSC under address
[email protected] and pointed out above technical problem
of UPSC site in Maharashtra and what he faced to complete the
form within time. Petitioner again at 10.43 p.m. pointed out the
difficulty. The technical problem prevented him from submitting
the form in time. It is noted even by respondent No. 2 in the
reply that petitioner has been submitting such forms earlier also
through the site in question. The petitioner, therefore, has
experience and knowledge how to operate such site and how to
fill in on-line forms. On earlier occasions, even by opening site
in question as required, the petitioner had already
kept/submitted his photograph and signature duly scanned in
jpg format as required. So there was no reason for petitioner not
to have those jpg format ready at the time of filling this
application. There was no reason for him, if there was response
and/or site was working not to complete the requisite on-line
information. Everything was working properly earlier, but at the
relevant time, as site was not responding when petitioner
4 wp 5126.17
wanted to submit the details in jpg format. The same could not
be uploaded, thus, in no way this can be stated to be intentional
or deliberate act of petitioner. The fact remains that petitioner
was unable to complete the form, who was otherwise ready and
eligible. For the technical failure of website, he could not
completed the same, which resulted into rejection of his
application for want of submission of details so required.
07. Respondent, in its reply, placed on record annexure dated
19.04.2017 referring to various grievances received from the
petitioner about UPSC (Preliminary) Examination 2017
regarding non submission of on-line application form, has
replied for the first time that the candidates or the petitioner
should not have waited for last date for submission of on-line
application. It is indeed an acceptable and an ideal situation.
But, there is no bar that the candidate cannot apply on last date.
The petitioner has applied on last date at about 5.00 p.m. and
submitted the form in all respects including the payment,
however, was unable to upload photograph and signature
because of technical defect of site. The contesting respondent,
except simple denial and putting burden upon petitioner, denied
the fact of crashing of server, as alleged by petitioner. This
factual aspect, cannot be gone into merely because of denial of
the respondent. Respondent No. 2 should have immediately
responded, when the petitioner through e-mail at 6.24 p.m.,
5 wp 5126.17
communicated to the concerned authority/department.
08. Petition is of 12.04.2017 & in response to notice issued by
this Court on 18.04.2017, the delayed reply dated 31.05.2017 filed
by respondent No. 2. There is no other remedy and/or solution to
such factual, technical difficulties faced by petitioner, so
recorded above. We have also noted that, there is no remedy
whatsoever available to petitioner and/or other persons, who for
such technical defect, unable to complete the form in time,
though he was ready to upload all the details available with him.
09. We could not have entertained such petition in given case
for delay and latches and/or the grievance so raised, but
considering the fact and bonafide action so initiated by
petitioner immediately pointing out the defects and technical
problem of inability to upload details in time and as the question
is of career of petitioner and/or like students/candidates and also
for fact that there is no justification and/or remedy made
available by respondent No. 2 to handle and tackle with such
problem, we are inclined to entertain present petition, in the
interest of justice. The persons like petitioner should not be
made to suffer because of website technical defect and/or
difficulties on the last day of filling such applications.
10. As per advertisement, the examination is scheduled on
6 wp 5126.17
18.06.2017. Petitioner admittedly did not receive any hall
ticket/e-admission certificate within three weeks before
commencement of examination and as the same is requisite for
candidates to down-load e-admission certificate and as no e-
admission certificate is required to be sent by post, we are
inclined to direct respondent No. 2 to issue e-admission
certificate.
11. The petitioner has completed all other formalities in time.
Even earlier jgp format photograph and signature was available
with respondent No. 2, as petitioner had already appeared in
2016 for such examination. Petitioner is directed to submit or
send e-mail to respondent No. 2 again, if required, jpg format
photograph and signature. As there is no sufficient time left
and as case is made out, we are inclined to pass following order
to avoid further delay.
O R D E R
A. Respondent No. 2 is directed to issue e-admission
certificate and/or hall ticket in the name of petitioner, (in
whichever name it is called).
B. Respondent No. 2 is also directed to accept photograph
and signature of petitioner, if required, and it is further
directed to respondent No. 2 and/or its agent/examination
7 wp 5126.17
coordinator/centre supervisor to permit the petitioner to
appear for Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination,
which is to be held on 18.06.2017 as per advertisement
dated 22.02.2017, at Aurangabad.
C. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs.
D. Parties to act on the basis of authenticated copy.
E. As order is passed in open Court, respondent No. 2 to take
steps without waiting for certified copy of the
judgment/order.
Sd/- Sd/-
[SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J.] [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]
bsb/June 17
