HC directive on job interview

In his order related to a petition filed against the MPSC, Justice SR Sen said, “When any examination is called for, any relation or known person of any candidate should not be in the panel of interview.

He said, “In the past few years, it seems there are lots of scams regarding examination results, it should not occur again and again, otherwise the confidence of the people on the examination system is bound to collapse.”

The writ petition was filed by a candidate Disaka Elliotte Laloo against the decision of the Meghalaya Public Service Commission (MPSC) to keep in abeyance the select list dated April 4, 2017 as it is highly illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory.

Laloo was one among the candidates who was selected for the post of Ayurvedic Physician under the Health and Family Welfare Department. While one Senorita Ginny Arengh was placed at serial No. 1 in the select list, Laloo was placed at serial No. 2.

The personal interviews were held on February 22, this year.

During the hearing, counsel appearing for MPSC K. Paul filed an affidavit enclosing an enquiry report dated May 10 and argued that the interview board member SM Laloo was related to the petitioner.

Therefore, he informed when it came to the notice and realization of the board and after receiving the complaint decided to hold a written examination.

He also further contended that if the petitioner is confident why is she so anxious to face the written examination.

The Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner H.S. Thangkhiew, contended that there is no prove that the petitioner is a relative or relation of the member of the interview board with regards to the interview conducted by the MPSC on February 22, to which the petitioner came out successfully.

Thereafter, the respondent decided to conduct a written examination which is highly illegal and put a stigma against the petitioner. Hence, the written examination supposed to be held again may be set aside, he said.

Dismissing the writ petition, the Court decided not to interfere with the written examination as decided by the MPSC.

“I am not in a position to interfere with the written examination as decided by the MPSC. In case, any candidate who appeared earlier has overage, his/her age is to be condoned for the fresh examination,” Justice Sen stated in the order.

Earlier, Justice Sen said that after analyzing the submissions, affidavits and the confidential file, he is of the opinion that there may be some mistake and error done somewhere.

“Therefore, the remedy left to instill confidence in the minds of the public is to conduct a written examination with proper syllabus,” he said.

After going through the affidavit filed by the MPSC, the Court said it appears that there was some mistake and it cannot be said confidently that the board member is not related to the petitioner.

“I have also perused the confidential file submitted by the learned counsel for the MPSC and found that the marks given to the different candidates cannot be relied upon safely as it appears that the petitioner got the highest mark, and in comparison with her marks other candidates obtained 2, 3, 4 etc. Therefore, how far the score sheet is correct and genuine cannot be ascertained,” Justice Sen said.