Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ashu Bala vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 19 December, 2014
Author: Rajiv Narain Raina
Bench: Rajiv Narain Raina
CWP No.21366 of 2013
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.21366 of 2013
Date of decision: 19.12.2014
Ashu Bala
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Present: Mr.R.K.Arora, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.APS Mann, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr.Shekhar Verma, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.
Mr.Pardeep Rajput, Advocate,
for respondent No.3.
*****
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J. (Oral)
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the decision in Naresh Kumari v. State of Punjab and another; CWP No.21090 of 2013 passed on 10th November, 2014 covers this case and, therefore, similar directions are called for.
It is not disputed that the petitioner's name was on the merit list and 3 candidates who were offered appointment did not join service and, therefore, did not occupy the post. Non-occupation of the post (or what is PARITOSH KUMAR 2014.12.22 10:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No.21366 of 2013 :2: called non-consumption) keeps the post vacant for filling from the person next below in the merit.
For the foregoing reasons, this petition is allowed in the same terms as in CWP No.21090 of 2013. The respondents would offer appointment to the petitioner after completing all formalities and his services would be governed thereafter by NCT guidelines. In case, a training programme is underway, the petitioner may be sent forthwith.
(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE December 19, 2014 Paritosh Kumar PARITOSH KUMAR 2014.12.22 10:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document