Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sachin Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 11 March, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:034553
CWP-3584-2025
2025 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
114 CWP
CWP-3584-2025
Date of Decision:
Decision:11.03.2025
SACHIN KUMAR ...Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA
Present:- Mr. Sarthak Gupta,
Gupta Advocate for the petitioner
petitioner.
Mr. K. K. Chahal, Addl. A. G., Haryana
Haryana.
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA,
DAHIYA J. (Oral)
The petition has been filed, inter alia alia, seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the final result dated 27.07.2024, Annexure P P-8,, for the post of TGT Physical Education, Rest of Haryana and Mewat cadres, in response to advertisement 02/2023, dated 21.02.2023,, to the extent the petitioner's roll number ber has not been reflected therein.
there
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner's candidature for the post of TGT Physical Education under General/Dependent of Ex-servicemen servicemen (DESM) category has been wrongly rejected since his application form, Annexure P-2, P had no column to apply under DESM category. Left with no other option, he applied as General category candidate.. Learned counsel has referred to the application forms issued to other candidates for the same post, Annexure P-10, P 10, wherein option to apply under DESM category has been given.
3. Learned State State counsel has produced a print printout, dated 10.03.2025,, of the petitioner's application form submitted on 04.03.2023 at 12:31:28 PM,, which is taken on record as Annexure-A. Annexure It shows there was a specific column "Dependent Dependent of Ex-servicemen"
Ex against which the petitioner had respond responded ed 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 18-03-2025 22:27:44 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:034553 CWP-3584-2025 2025 -2- with the word "none".. She accordingly contends that the assertion by the petitioner to the contrary is not correct.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner, however, disputes the fact and contends that the correct application form submitted by the petitioner is the one which has been appended to the petition as Annexure P P-2. The he Commission later amended application form by providing the option to claim reservation un nder DESM category as well; the printout Annexure-A,, therefore, indicates indicate the same.
5. These disputed facts regarding vveracity of the petitioner's These application form, form dated 04.03.2023,, cannot be established in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction jurisdi by this Court.. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court with ith the grievance raised herein, if so advised.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)) JUDGE 11.03.2025 Ad Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 18-03-2025 22:27:45 :::