Gujarat High Court: In an application against Gujarat Public Service Commission’s action of calling the petitioner to travel 300 kilometers for an interview after 3 days of delivery of child, Nikhil S. Kariel, J. condemned this action and directed the respondent to not declare the interview results for the post of Assistant Manager (Finance and Accounts) Class II, till further orders of the Court.
Factual Matrix
The petitioner had applied for selection to the post of Assistant Manager (Finance and Accounts) Class II in the year 2020. After her selection, the results were declared on 08-12-2023 i.e. approximately three years after the petitioner had applied for the post. The interview was fixed for the petitioner and other candidates on 01-01-2024. The petitioner submitted a representation inter alia informing that she is pregnant, and the due date was in the 1st week of January 2024, and that it would be impossible for her, who was residing at Gandhidham to travel to Gandhinagar almost 300 kilometers in the advanced stage of her pregnancy. The petitioner gave birth to a child on 31-12-2023 and the respondent, Gujarat Public Service Commission was informed vide an E-mail with a request to postpone the interview or provide an alternative solution for the same. The respondents informed the petitioner that she should remain present for an interview on 02-01-2024 and that no further time could be granted.
Order
“The present petition reflects the absolute gender insensitivity of the respondents towards one of the most sacred natural processes i.e. of giving birth to a child.”
The Court said that it was apparent that the petitioner, a meritorious candidate, would not be physically capable of attending the interview on the 3rd day of her delivery, yet, without considering the request of the petitioner for either postponement or for providing some alternative method, the respondents filed an absolute gender insensitive reply.
The Court opined that the Public Service Commission, whose primary duty is to conduct selection process, could not have remained oblivious to such a kind of situation and that it was incumbent upon the respondent to either postpone the interview process or to provide an alternative solution like an online interview etc. if the same is permissible as per the rules, when such a reasonable request was made. The Court also said that the selection process itself was not something which was going at a lightning pace, since an advertisement which was issued in the year 2020, the results of the examination was declared by the respondent in the month of December 2023.
Therefore, the Court issued Notice to the respondents for hearing on 12-01-2024 and directed the respondent to not declare the interview results insofar as the post of Assistant Manager (Finance and Accounts) Class II, till further orders of the Court.
[Radhika Shankarbhai Pawar v. Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC) Through Secretary, 2024 SCC OnLine Guj 316, Order dated: 09-01-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioner: Advocate Brijesh K Ramanuj
