Petitioners, who are three in number, were the applicants for the post of Assistant Review Officer (ARO) in the employment of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in terms of the Advertisement published on 29.07.2009. Petitioners were invited for participation in the Objective Test. They responded thereto by answering the questions put in the prescribed OMR Sheet. After evaluation of the OMR Sheet, it was found that the petitioners achieved 34 marks which was well below the cut of marks calculated as per the ratio of 20 persons against one post for the purposes of further participation in the selections. The last candidate eligible had 58 marks within the category to which the petitioners belong while the petitioners had secured 34 marks. Accordingly the subjective test answer sheets of the petitioners were not evaluated nor they were invited for participation in type list.
By means of the present writ petition, petitioners seek quashing of the entire selections including declaration of result of the objective test on the ground that question paper had been prepared in English language only and not in Hindi.
He submits that the issue with regard to use of Hindi language as a medium in selections for employment in the service of the Allahabad High Court was subject matter of consideration in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 6314 of 1999, Balraj Misra & Another vs. Hon'ble The Chief Justice of High Court, Allahabad and others decided on 14.10.1999 wherein it was laid down that in future selections for promotion on the post of Bench Secretaries (BS) Grade II, the candidates shall not be required to write their answers in English language only. They should be given an option to write their answers in English or Hindi.
He further submits that the directions so issued will apply with full force in the matter of appointment as ARO in the establishment of High Court. Reference has been made to Article 351 of the Constitution of India which castes a duty to promote the spread of Hindi language so that it may serve as a medium of expression for all the elements of composite culture of India.
Counsel for the High Court in reply refers to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindi Hitrakshak Samiti and others vs. Union of India and others reported in (1990) 2 SCC, 352 as also upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sunil K.R. Sahastrabudhey vs. Director IIT, Kanpur reported in AIR 1982 Allahabad, 398. He submits that Hindi has not been declared as the official language of the Court till date. Vide Gazette notification dated 10.11.1973, proviso has been added to Rule 8 of Chapter VII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 wherein use of Hindi in place of English has been made optional in any judgment, decree or order to be passed subject to the condition that the same shall be accompanied by an authorized English translation. In these circumstances the decision of the Hon'ble Judges Committee to hold examinations in English only cannot be faulted with. Such decisions are policy decisions which warrant no interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
From the judgment referred to above and the factual position as it stands today, it is apparently clear that Hindi has not been declared to be the official language of the High Court till date. Under Clause 2 of Article 348, a power has been conferred upon the Governor of a State with the previous consent of the President to authorize the use of Hindi language in the proceedings of the high Court. The power has not been exercised and only optional use of Hindi under the Official Language Act has been permitted. Further in the case of Prabandhak Samiti and another v. Zila Vidhyalaya Nirikshak and others, AIR 1977 All, 164 the issue with regard to Hindi being not the official language of the Court has been considered in details. It is not necessary for this Court to reiterate the same.
So far as the judgment relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner in the case of Balraj Misra (Supra), the Court only provided that in future eligible candidates appearing in the examination for the promotion to the post of Bench Secretary Grade II shall not be compelled to write their answers in English language only. No general directions have been issued in the matter of direct recruitment for other posts in the establishment of the High Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present writ petition.
This Court may record that U.P. Official Language Act, 1951 provides Hindi to be as the language to be used in the State of U.P., yet there has been no notification adopting Hindi as the official language of the High Court.
Moreover, the petitioners had appeared in the objective examination without protest and had answered the questions put to them in English language to the best of their ability, they have not been successful. The petitioners cannot be now permitted to turn around and challenge the process of selection on the plea that the question papers should be in Hindi.
The writ petition is therefore, found to be without merit. This Court can only express its desire that the Selection Committee may consider preparing of the question papers, both in English and Hindi language for future selections in light of Article 351 of the Constitution of India.
Writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Dated : 12.07.2011 VR/27287/11