Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jai Parkash vs State Of Haryana And Others on 10 July, 2024
CWP-23468-2021 1 2024 PRHC 088076 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.252 CWP-23468-2021 Date of Decision: 10.07.2024 Jai Parkash .... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Ravinder Bangar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, DAG, Haryana and Mr. Parveen Mehta, DAG, Haryana. 3K 2 3k TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)
The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to select the petitioner for the post of Art and Craft Teacher against advertisement no.6 of 2006, category no.22, being qualified and meritorious candidate in Ex-servicemen General (ESM-
GEN) category.
2. Facts of the case in brief are as under:
2.1. The third respondent-Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC) issued the aforementioned advertisement dated 20.07.2006; the last date for submission of application was 21.08.2006. The selection was challenged before this Court and the matter went up to the Supreme Court;
after dismissal of SLP in the matter on 10.11.2020, the selection was carried out afresh in compliance of order, dated 20.02.2015, passed by this Court in CWP No.18482 of 2020. Written examination for the post was held on 31.01.2021, and its result was declared on 23.02.2021, Annexure P-8. After MANINDER 2024.08.02 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-23468-2021 2 2024 PRHC 088076 completing the process for scrutiny of documents and interview, final selection result was declared on 14.11.2021.
2.2. The petitioner, who applied for the post under DESM-GEN category, secured 104 marks in the written examination, whereas the last selected candidate in the category secured 96 marks, which included the marks of interview as well. But the petitioner was not recommended against DESM-GEN category post for want of eligibility certificate; the certificate submitted by him was dated 16.06.2016, which was issued after the cut-off date, 21.08.2006. In this background, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the instant petition.
3. Learned counsel has contended that the petitioner's candidature was wrongly rejected despite there being no dispute that he belonged to DESM-GEN category. He was always considered under the category, as he had duly submitted certificate to that effect, dated 19.08.2006, Annexure P-16, at the time of scrutiny of documents. Since the certificate has been issued prior to the cut-off date, he could not have been declared ineligible for the post in question.
4. Learned State counsel, on the contrary, contends that the only certificate submitted by the petitioner to the Commission in support of his claim for being a candidate under DESM-GEN category was dated 16.06.2016, Annexure R-3. Since it was issued after the cut-off date, it could not have been taken into consideration to decide the petitioner's eligibility under the category.
5. Heard.
6. The petitioner applied under DESM-GEN category for the post in question and his candidature was duly considered. He cleared the written examination and was called for scrutiny of documents as well as interview.
MANINDER . . . e 2024.08.02 10:16 Despite being meritorious, the only reason he could not be recommended attest to the accuracy an order/judgment.
CWP-23468-2021 3 2024 PRHC 088076 was non-eligibility under the category. As per clear instructions and conditions of the advertisement, the candidates belonging to DESM-GEN category were required to attach eligibility certificate from the competent authority issued before the last date of submission of application forms, 21.08.2006. The Commission again issued public notice dated 10.03.2021, requiring the candidates to bring all supporting documents at the time of interview, issued prior to the cut-off date which would be considered for deciding the eligibility. It was only at the time of final verification to decide eligibility that the petitioner was found not eligible since the certificate establishing the claim to be from DESM-GEN category submitted by him had been issued after the cut-off date on 16.06.2016.
7. Since learned counsel for the petitioner disputed the respondents' claim, and contended that the certificate dated 19.08.2006, which was issued to the petitioner prior to the cut-off date was, in fact, submitted to the Commission, original record of petitioner's selection was perused. The said certificate is not a part of the record, and the only eligibility certificate submitted by the petitioner in support of his claim was dated 16.06.2016 (bearing no.165/2016). Resultantly, the petitioner could not have been considered eligible under DESM-GEN category on that basis, and no exception can be taken to rejection of his candidature by the Commission.
8. In view thereof, the petition stands dismissed being devoid of merit.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA) JUDGE 10.07.2024 Maninder MANINDER Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2024.08.02 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and Whether reportable : Yes/ No authenticity of this order/judgment.