Uma Shankar Sharma v. Union of India and Ors.

., **B** .. **c** **D** **B** **F** **G** **B** and that as he· had been discharging his duties to the satisfaction of his superior **officers** **ever since December.** _**1975**_ **and** **had,** **in fact, captained the sports** **team** **on** behalf of the Excise Department at Calcutta for two years, he was astonished that the question should be raised later. Another fonrteen months thereafter, on 16th June, 1979, the Assistant Collector (Headquarters) made an order purporting to be under the proviso to sub-rule ( 1) of Rule _5_ of the Central Civt1 Service (Temporary Service) Rnles 1965, terminating the services of the appellant. The appellmt then applied for relief under Article 226 of the ConstitQtion to the High Court against the order, but the High Court has summarily dismissed the **writ petition.** ' Allowing the appeal on special leave, the Court HEID : The terms and conditions of seryice are intended to be construed reasonably, and too technical a view can defeat the essential sprit and intent em**bodied** **in** **them.** **The** **intention was to appoint meritorious** **sportsmen.** **to** **the** posts, and that object is served if a person who had qualified and was selected for **representing** **bis** **university** **in** **an Inter-University** **Tournament** **conducted** **by** **the** Inter-University Sports Board is appointed, notwithstanding that he was actually prevented from participating because of reasons beyond his control. [733 A-cl In the instant case, the respondents have proceeded on a technical view of th• matter wholly unjustified by. the intent behind the condition of eligibility. #### ~ r ' ~ ,, ' ·~ )e '' ## • **7l!O** UMA SHANKAR SHARMA _v._ '- THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. _April_ 17, 1980 [R. S. SARKARIA AND R. S. PATHAK, JJ.] _**Termination of service-Condition of eligibi1ity**_ _**for**_ _**selection**_ _**as**_ _**Inspector**_ _**of**_ _**Cent1:,al**_ _**Excise**_ **viz..** _**"should be a sportsman who have represented the**_ _**Universi-**_ _**ties**_ _**in**_ _**the Inter**_ _**UniVersity**_ _**Tournament**_ _**conducted**_ _**by**_ _**the Inter-University**_ _**Board''-Terms**_ _**·and**_ _**conditions of service should be construed reasonably.**_ ###### **'1'· .** ' . ·:- - **The appellant** **was** **selected for** **and** **appointed** **in** **a temporary vacancy of** Ins**pector** **of** **Central** **Excise,** **as** **be** **was** **found** **to** **be** **a** **"Sportsman** **who** **has** **repre-** **sent¢** **the -Universities in** **the** **Inter** **University Tournament conducted** **by** **the** Inter-University Sports Board". He joined duty and continued therein. On 30-4-1976 the Assistant Collector (Head Quarters) Central Excise called for the' original sports certificate on the ground _tpat_ only attested copies were furnished - by the appellant earlier. The appellant furnished the original documents on 5-7-76. After a year, he was directed to supply the details of the tournament at which he had represented the University. On 27-2-78, the appellant referred to the sports certificate dated 28th Jnly 1975 issued by the Deputy Registrar of Mithila University, Darbhanga. The appellant explained that he had qualified **and_** **was** **selected, to represent the Mithila University** **in** **the** **Inter-University** Tournament to be held at the Banaras Hindu University, Varahasi, in the year 1972 but that a serious illness had intervened and prevented him from actually participating in the tournament. He pointed out that this had been made clear by him during the interview for selection before the Appointments Cominittee UMA SHANKER _v ._ . UNION _(Pqthak,_ 1.) 731 The CO!ldition required that the applicant should have been a sportsman who bad A represented his Wliversity iB an Inter.Unive11ity Tournament conducted by the Inter-University Sports Board. Tile appellant did qualify, and was selected, fOr repreaenting the Mithila University in the Inter-University Toornament at the Banaras Hindu University in the year 1972. All that remained was that he should have participated in tho tournament. Unfortunately, for him, he fell ill and was unable to do so. The fact that he fell ill, and for that reason was unablo to represent his univ0I1ity, is not disputed. There is nothing to show B that but for that illness he· would not have actually taken i>OFt in the tourna ment. On a reasonable view of the facts the apellant should be taken to have · fulfilled the conditions of eligibility. [732 G-H, 733 Al ,. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2994 of 1979. Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Decree dated ' 11-7-1979 of the Patna High Court in Civil Writ Petition,No. 1936 of 1979. _Dr._ _Y._ _S. Chitale_ and.P. _P._ _Singh_ for the Appellant. _R. B. Datar_ and _Miss A. Subhashini_ for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PAmAK, J : This appeal by special leave is directed againstan order of the Patna High Court dismissing the appellant's writ petition against the termination of his services. _I_ The Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Patna, invited, by an advertisement dated 30th July, 1975, applications for filling up some posts of Inspector of Central Excise. Among those eligible for selection were "sportsmen who have represented the Universities in the Inter-University Tournament conducted by the Inter-University Sports Board." The appellant, who was studying in the M. A. (Political Science) in the Mithila etJniversity, was one of the applicants and he was directed to appear for a physical test and, an interview. On 12th December, 1975 _the Collector of Central c D E I!' G H &cise and Customs issued a letter informing the appellant that he had been selected for appointment in a temporary vacancy of Inspector, and that he would be on probation for a period of _two_ years. The appellant joined the post and continued therein. On 30th April, 1976 he received a letter from the Assistant Collector (Headquarters) Central Excise pointing out that he had submitted atte~ted copies only of the sports certificates along: with his application foe appointment and he was directed to submitJthe:original certificates. The appellant forwarded the original certificates. Nothing happened for some time, and the appe!Iant continued in the post without any objection. It was almost a year later that the Assistant Collector (Head quarters) wrote to the appellant to supply details of the tournament at _I_, , <)' 732 SUPREME COURT RBPUK I> [1980] 3 S.C.lt. A B c E G b Iii tliis app:al, the itppellant contends that he fulfile4 the conditions of eligibility and that there was no justification for terminating his services. The case of the respondents is that the appellant was appointed under a mistak-e inasmw:h as the oondltion of eligibility required actual representation. of a University in an Inter-University Tournament conducted by the Inter-University Sports Board and that, therefore, the appellant was not entitled to any relief against the termination of -~ his services. \ Having given the matter our careful consideration, it seems to us that the respondents have proceeded on a technical view of the matter wholly unjustified by the intent behind the condition of eligibility. The condition required that the applicant should have been a sportsman who had represented his university in an Inter-University Tournament conducted by the Inter-University Sports Board. There is no dispute before us that the appellant did qualify, and was selected, for representing the :Mithila University in the Inter-University Tournament at the Banaras Hindu University in the year 1972. All that remained was that he should have participated in the tournament. Unfortunately, for him, he fell ill and was unable to do so. The fact that he fell ill, 'Yhich he had represelltOd the University. OR 27tl!. Fel!lruary, 19V8 the llf>P~ltmt refet'l'etlto ttib Sp<!lrts GG!ltiftoatll dat~ 28th July, 1975 issm:d "Y th\! Diit!lllfy Regl!ltt!lt of the L. l'IT. Mlthllll T:Jnh•ersiry, Da!'blianga. ~ tl~igi'i!al C'ettlllcatl! had bee!\ sent by film to the Collector, along with the other cettiffcates on 5th .May, 1970. The appellant explained that he had qualified and was selected, to represent the Mithila University in the Inter-University Tournament to be held at Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, in the year 1972 bllt that.a serious illness had intervened and prevented him from aotually participating in the tournam:nt. H: p)inted out that this had been made clear byhim;during the interview·for selection before the Appointments Committee and that as he,had b~eti discharging his duties to the satisfaction of his, sup:lfor officers ever since December, 1975 and had, in fact,. captained the sports team on behalf of the Excise Department at Calcutta for two years, he. was astonished that the question should be raised now. Another fourteen months later, on 16th June, 1979, the Assistant Collector (HeadqlfarterS) made an order, purporting to be under the 'proviso to sub-rule (I) of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Service (Tem-' porary Service) Rules 1965, terminating the services of the appellant. Tl:te ap)l~\tant theh applied for re1tef under Article 226 of the Consti· . ttitiun to tlie Hilih C®rt against the c5rder, but the High Court has snmm1rily dismissed the writ petition. · ##### "t'' # _r_ " ;.,.., UMA SHANKER _v._ UNION _(Pathak,_ J.) 733 and for that reason w.as u11a.ble to re,pri:&ent .b,i~ university, is not dis· puted. There is nothing to ~how that but for that illness he would not have actually taken part in the tournament. It seems to us that on a reasonable view ofthe facts the appellant shoul<l be. taken to have fulfilled the condition of eligibility. The terms and conditions of sel'Vice are intended to be constrll¢ reilsOl\~ly, and too technical a view can defeat the essential spirit and intent embodied in thenj. Tb.e in t~ntion was to appoint meritorious sportsmen to the posts, and that object is served if a person who had qualified and was selected for representing his university in an Inter-University Tournament conducted by the Inter-University Sports Board i~ appoi)),ted, notwith· sta.nding that he was actually prevented from par;ticip11ting b,eca~ of reasons beyond his control. We have no doubt that on the interpretation which has found favour with us the appellant will he entitled .to a certificiit.e of eligibility, a requirement postulated by the terms of his appointment. A B c The appeal is allowed, the .order dated 16th J\llle, 1979 made .by the D Assistant Collector (Headquarters) i~ qu11she<;I 'and .the respon~lllltls Me directed to treat the appellant.as oontinuing in service. The appeliant is entitled to his (;osts throughout. S . .R. _Jppea/ al i owed._