Gauhati High Court
Ms. Shilpa Kumari vs Oil India Ltd. And 5 Ors on 27 July, 2022
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010287862019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/8671/2019
MS. SHILPA KUMARI
D/O. SURENDRA PRASAD, D PLUS 107 OPPOSITE OIL INDIA LTD.
HOSPITAL DULIAJAN-786602, DIST. DUBRUGARH
VERSUS
OIL INDIA LTD. AND 5 ORS.
DULIAJAN REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM NANAGING DIRECTOR,
DULIAJAN-786602, DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM.
2:THE GENERAL MANAGER PERSONAL DEPTT. FIELD HEAD QUARTER
DULIAJAN-786602
DIST. DIBRUGARH.
3:THE CHAIRMAN
REP. BY GM (MEDICAL SERVICES) MEDICAL DEPTT.
OIL INDIA LTD. DULIAJAN-786602
DIST. DIBRUGARH
ASSAM.
4:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
(ADMINISTRATIVE)/PGO OIL INDIA LTD. DIST. DIBRUGARH.
5:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (LAND AND LEGAL)
AND CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER
OIL INDIA LTD. DULIAJAN-786602.
6:TO THE PRINCIPAL GUWAHATI MEDICAL COLLEGE
PIN-781032
DIST. KAMRUP
Page No.# 2/5
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. S BORPATRA GOHAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, O I L
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
27.07.2022
1. Heard Mr. R.C. Borpatra Gohain, learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel for Oil
India Limited.
2. The petitioner's case in brief is that pursuant to an Advertisement
dated 29.11.2018, issued by the Oil India Limited, for the post of
Superintending Medical Officer (Gynaecology), the petitioner applied for
the said post. The marks allotted in the selection process, as reflected in
the Advertisement dated 29.11.2018 are as follows :
Selection Total Marks Qualifying Marks
3. The petitioner took part in the Written Test on 17.03.2019 and
secured 51 marks in the Written Test. The Personal Interview was held
on 07.06.2019 and the petitioner secured 5 marks in the interview. No
Page No.# 3/5
Group Discussion was held by the respondents. The petitioner
thereafter undertook the Pre-Employment Medical Examination (PEME)
on 10.06.2019.
4. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner was the lone
candidate, who had taken part in the Personal Interview and in the
PEME. The petitioner having secured the qualifying marks in the written
test and personal interview, the petitioner should have been appointed
to the post of Superintending Medial Officer (Gynaecology). However, the
respondents did not appoint the petitioner. On enquiry, the petitioner
came to learn that the total marks that had been allotted for Personal
Interview had been raised by the respondents to 15 marks and the
qualifying marks for Personal Interview was raised to 7.5 marks.
5. The petitioner's counsel submits that as the petitioner had secured
the required qualifying marks for appointment in terms of the
Advertisement dated 29.11.2018 and as the petitioner had also been
found to be fit for appointment in the PEME, appointment order should
have been issued by the respondents.
6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
rules of the game cannot be changed after the game has been played
and in this respect he has relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court
in the case of Mohd. Raisul Islam & Others vs. Gokul Mohan Hazarika &
Others, reported in (2010) 7 SCC 560; Tez Prakash Pathak & Others vs.
Rajasthan High Court and Others, reported in (2013) 4 SCC 540 and the
judgment of this Court passed in WP(C) 3864/2018 (Sri Jibon Kalita &
Others vs. The State of Assam & 5 Others). He accordingly prays that
the petitioner should be appointed to the post of Superintending Medial
Page No.# 4/5
Officer (Gynaecology), pursuant to the Advertisement dated 29.11.2018
7. Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel for the Oil India Limited
submits that though the total marks provided for the Personal Interview
in terms of the Advertisement dated 29.11.2018 was 10 marks with
qualifying marks of 5, the same had to be changed in terms of the
guidelines for recruitment made by the Oil India Limited on 01.03.2016,
which provides that when Group Discussion is not conducted,
weightage of the interview will be 15% of the total marks. Accordingly,
weightage in the selection process for the various components had to be
allotted as followed :- Written Test was to have 85% of the marks. 5%
marks reserved for Group Discussion would have to be added to the
10% marks reserved for the Personal Interview. As such, the qualifying
marks for interview would be 7.5 marks and not 5 marks, as provided in
the guideline dates 01.03.2016. He also submits that as per the General
information and instructions provided in the Advertisement dated
29.11.2018, Oil India Limited reserved the right to
cancel/restrict/enlarge/ modify/alter the recruitment process if the
need so arose, without issuing any further notice or assigning any
reason whatsoever. He also submits that the marks of the petitioner
were made known to the petitioner on 22.10.2019. Also, as per the dates
of the selection process given in the Advertisement dated 29.11.2018,
the Personal Interview held on 07.06.2019 and the PEME was held on
08.06.2019. He also submits that the final statement of marks, which
have been signed by the 5 Member Committee, shows that the total
marks allotted for Personal Interview was 15 and pass mark was shown
as 7.5 marks. As the petitioner did not secure the qualifying marks for
Personal Interview, the petitioner could not be appointed.
Page No.# 5/5
8. Clause B(05) of the Guidelines for Recruitment in Executive Cadre
issued by the Director (HR & BD) of Oil India Limited vide letter
No.CMD/OIL/PER/14D/RP-145 dated 01.03.2016 states as follows :
As already approved, weigtage of various components will be as
under :
SELECTION TOOL WEIGHTAGES IN THE
SELECTION PROCESS
GATE Score/Written test 85%
Group Discussion/Group 5%
Task*
Interview 10%
· Wherever GD/GT is not conducted, weightage of interview will be
15%
9. List the matter on 09.08.2022 as Part-Heard.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
