HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 4197 OF 2010 Between: Dr. S.A.V. Chandrasekhar S/o Late Poornayya ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Ministry of Environment & Forests represented by its Secretary, CGO, Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi and three others .....RESPONDENTS ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari declaring the order dated 16.12.2009 passed in O.A.No. 667 of 2008 on the file of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad as illegal and quash the same. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner in response to the advertisement issued in Employment News dated 29th March 2008 and 4th April 2008 for recruitment to the post of Scientist-C in Zoological Survey of India, applied for the same as he possesses the minimum qualification. It is stated that interviews for the post of Scientist-C were going to be held on 5th and 6th November 2008 and he had not received any call letter, therefore, he approached the Tribunal seeking permission to appear for the interview. Initially, the Tribunal vide order dated 29th October 2008 passed an interim order directing the respondents to permit the petitioner-applicant to appear for the interview for the post of Scientist-C in Zoological Survey of India, scheduled to be held on 5th and 6th November 2008 but the result of the interview shall be subject to the final outcome of the O.A. On the other side, respondents filed reply and drew attention to Clause (xi) of the advertisement under the caption “General Conditions”, they have pointed out that the prescribed educational qualifications are minimum and it would be open to the Ministry to restrict the number of candidates to be interviewed to a reasonable limit by adopting qualifications and experience of a higher level than the minimum prescribed in the advertisement. Respondents also referred clause (xii) under the caption ‘General Conditions” that no correspondence/representation will be entertained in regard to interview or selection. The Tribunal after going through the entire material made available on record following the judgment reported in UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. T. SUNDARARAMAN AND OTHERS[1], observed that respondents were entitled to prepare a short list of candidates to be called for interview on the basis of all the applications of eligible candidates meeting the minimum selection criteria. The Tribunal also relied on the Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in UNION OF INDIA VS. PUHPA RANI AND OTHERS[2] and accordingly, dismissed the O.A. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the order passed by the Tribunal in dismissing the O.A is illegal and arbitrary. On the other hand learned Standing Counsel for Central Government contended that the petitioner got less marks prescribed under Clause (xi) of the advertisement under the caption “General Conditions”, therefore, he has not called for interview and only meritorious candidates were called for the interview. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and also perused the material made available on record. As seen from the record, it is no doubt true that the petitioner applied for the pot of Scientist-C in Zoological Survey of India in response to the advertisement in Employment News dated 29th March 2008 and 4th April 2008. It is also no doubt true that the Tribunal initially, vide order dated 29th October 2008 directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear for the interview for the post of Scientist-C in Zoological Survey of India scheduled to be held on 5th and 6th November 2008 and finally dismissed the O.A following the judgments of the Supreme Court. Be that as it may, as seen from the judgments referred to by the Tribunal, the Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. T. SUNDARARAMAN AND OTHERS (SUPRA-I), observed that if a large number of applications are received, the competent authority may shortlist candidates for interview on the basis of higher qualifications although all applicants may possess the requisite minimum qualifications. It was also observed that it is always open to the recruiting agency to screen candidates due for consideration at the threshold of the process of selection can be narrowed down with the ultimate objective of promoting candidates with higher qualifications to enter the zone of consideration. In UNION OF INDIA VS. PUSHPA RANI AND OTHERS (supra-2) the Supreme Court observed that the limits of judicial interference in matters relating to sources/mode of recruitment, prescription of qualification, selection criteria etc., were laid down. The Supreme Court also observed that judicial review comes into play in such matters only if State action is contrary to constitutional or statutory provisions, or is patently arbitrary or vitiated by mala fides. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal following the above judgments of the Supreme Court rightly dismissed the O.A. We see no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal and accordingly, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _________________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD ,J DATE: 01.06.2010 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies. [1] (1997) 4 SCC 664 [2] (2008) 9 SCC 242