Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajbir Kaur vs State Of Haryana And Others on 22 July, 2013
Author: Rajiv Narain Raina
Bench: Rajiv Narain Raina
Kumar Paritosh
CWP No.10497 of 2013 2013.08.02 10:311
I agree to specified portions
of this document
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP NO.10497 OF 2013
DATE OF DECISION : 22.07.2013
Rajbir Kaur
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
..... Respondents
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Present: Mr. Sandeep K.Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court asserting that her candidature for appointment to the post of Post-Graduate Teacher in Punjabi has been wrongly rejected by the Interview Committee on the ground that one of her Guest Teacher Experience Certificates was not counter-signed by the Director, Secondary Education Haryana, Panchkula as required under Note 3 of the advertisement dated 7.6.2012, through which applications were invited for appointment to the various posts including that of Post- Graduate Teachers.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working as a Lecturer in Govt. Girls Senior Secondary School, Safidon for the last about 6 years. At the time of interview she produced two experience certificates out of which one from 18.04.2009 to 30.06.2012 (Annexure P-2) was duly signed by the Principal of the Institute, the District Education Officer, Jind and was countersigned by the Deputy Kumar Paritosh CWP No.10497 of 2013 2013.08.02 10:312 I agree to specified portions of this document Director (Coordination) exercising powers of the Director Secondary Education Haryana, Panchkula and the another certificate for the period 17.06.2006 to 13.02.2009 (P-1) though signed by the Principal of the Institution as well as the District Education Officer, Jind was not countersigned by the Director, Secondary Education. If the latter was not reckoned the petitioner would be shy of requisite experience, and therefore disqualified.
Learned counsel argues that merely because the experience certificate (P-1) was not countersigned by the Director Secondary Education, Haryana, the petitioner cannot be deprived the opportunity of competing for appointment to public post. He submits that in the year 2009 there was neither requirement nor instructions of the Government of Haryana that the Guest Teacher Experience Certificate should be countersigned by the Director Secondary Education Haryana. Such condition has been prescribed subsequently in the advertisement dated 7.6.2012. Therefore, the second experience certificate (P-2) of the petitioner was acceptable as it was duly countersigned by the Director Secondary Education, Haryana.
Learned counsel further argues that the petitioner has been deprived of her valuable opportunity to seek civil employment in a totally mechanical and non-judicious manner. The action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner for appointment on a frivolous ground is illegal, arbitrary, unjustified, violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution and against the principles of natural justice, equity and fair play. He accordingly, contends that non-interviewing the petitioner by the respondents and instead rejecting her candidature is not sustainable.
In my considered opinion this contention of the counsel for the Kumar Paritosh CWP No.10497 of 2013 2013.08.02 10:313 I agree to specified portions of this document petitioner cannot be accepted. Notes 2 and 3 of the advertisement dated 07.06.2012 read as follows:-
"Note 2. A one time exemption of HTET/STET has been granted to the candidates who have worked for minimum 4 years till 11.04.2012 in privately managed Govt. Aided Schools, Recognized Schools and Govt. Schools. Candidate must be in service on 11.04.2012 in addition to being in position on the date of applying for the said post. They will have to qualify HTET not later than 1st April 2015 otherwise their services will be terminated automatically. Qualification/eligibility conditions and certificates will be determined with regard to last date fixed for submission of online applications also called as closing date given in the advertisement. Note 3. One time exemption certificate for HTET/STET & one time upper age relaxation certificate from Head of the Institute is required to be verified by DEO and counter signed by Director of Secondary Education of the concerned State. One time implies that an applicant can apply only once for a particular category of post in the first advertisement. No such exemption will be granted in the subsequent advertisement."
A perusal of the above would leave no manner of doubt that a one time exemption from HTET/STET was given which was based on an experience certificate of a candidate as having served as a Post Graduate Teacher in a privately managed government aided school, recognized school or a government school for a minimum period of four years till found working on 11.4.2012 was required to be issued by the Head of the Institution concerned and duly verified by the District Education Officer and counter- signed by the Director of Secondary Education, which admittedly the petitioner has not obtained or got done. The defect may be curable but not for the present recruitment process, where a large number of application forms are required to be processed within timelines. If a handle is given to Kumar Paritosh CWP No.10497 of 2013 2013.08.02 10:314 I agree to specified portions of this document cure defects the recruiting agency will be compelled to engage in correspondence with applicants which may never end making a mockery of the recruitment process. If there are only a handful of applicants and the post is superior in hierarchy and responsibility then perhaps the considerations might differ with a view to select absolutely the best talent and the most deserving in the public interest.
It is well settled that the terms and conditions contained in a public notice/advertisement or brochure are sacrosanct and the same cannot be relaxed or deviated from on pick and choose basis without Articles14 and 16 crying hoarse. These are not merely technicalities which can be overlooked and are expected to be followed in letter and spirit. I think that a teacher who lives by precept, an example to others of the value of education should be pinned more tightly on their applications forms and the terms and conditions of a brochure or public advertisement so that a student may not have a chance to mock. When a thing is required to be done in a particular manner, it should be done in the prescribed manner or not at all. Rules are not meant to be followed in the breach.
Having not fulfilled the mandate of the advertisement, the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner is in consonance with law which does not call for any interference by this Court.
Finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same is ordered to stand dismissed. No costs.
July 22, 2013 (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) PARITOSH KUMAR JUDGE