Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raminder Kaur vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 17 September, 2018
Bench: Krishna Murari, Arun Palli
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No.12 of 2018 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: 17.09.2018
Raminder Kaur
.....Appellant
versus
State of Punjab and another
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE
Present: Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant
..
KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral):
We condone the delay of six days in filing the appeal for the reasons stated in CM-21-LPA-2018 and application stands disposed of.
2. This intra-Court appeal has been filed under clause X of the Letters Patent by the petitioner challenging the judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated 29.09.2017 dismissing her writ petition seeking a relief of certiorari to quash the order dated 14.02.2013 rejecting her claim for appointment to the post of Lecturer in Biology under the dependant of Ex-servicemen category. Parity was also claimed with two other similarly situated candidates Mamta Rani and Jaswinder Singh.
3. Admitted facts are that petitioner-appellant applied for the post of Lecturer in Biology under the category of dependent of Ex-servicemen in response to an advertisement issued on 23.09.2009 by the Punjab State Education Department. Last date for submission of application forms was 09.10.2009. The requisite certificate to 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2018 18:55:55 ::: LPA-12-2018 - 2 -
demonstrate that she fell under the category of dependent of Ex- servicemen, admittedly, was not accompanying the application made by her. The petitioner-appellant obtained the said certificate on 11.11.2009 after the last date for submission of application forms was over and deposited the same thereafter. The respondent- authorities, finding that the certificate has not been produced as required by the terms and conditions on the last date of making application, treated her case in the open category and, since the marks secured by her were lesser than the last candidate selected, she was not given appointment.
4. The case set up before the learned single Judge was that even though the valid certificate claiming benefit of reservation was furnished after due date stipulated in the advertisement the condition was always liable to be relaxed and every infraction of prescribed condition relating to submission of proof need not necessarily result in rejection of appellant's application. The argument claiming parity with the case of Mamta Rani and Jaswinder Singh who were given appointment letters in identical circumstances was also raised.
5. The learned single Judge finding that the writ petition filed by certain identically situated candidates being CWP No.5560 of 2011 (Jaspal Kaur and others vs. State of Punjab and others) was dismissed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 02.11.2011, refused to interfere in the order impugned in the writ petition dated 14.02.2013. The parity claimed by the petitioner-appellant with Mamta Rani and Jaswinder Singh was also denied by the learned single Judge after having found that their appointments have subsequently been cancelled by the respondent-authorities.
2 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2018 18:55:55 :::
LPA-12-2018 - 3 -
6. The public notice issued by the respondents required the candidates to produce the relevant documents on the date fixed to demonstrate that they fulfill all the prescribed conditions of appointment. Thus, there was a cut-off date. The cut-off date prescribed is sacrosanct and there is a purpose attached to it. It is well settled that recruitment to public service should be held strictly in accordance with the terms of the recruitment rules, if any. Deviation from rules allows entry to ineligible persons on one hand and on the other hand deprives other similarly situated persons who are eligible in all respects on the cut-off date. This would result in complete arbitrariness and, thus, would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
7. An advertisement or notification issued/published prescribing conditions for appointment constitutes a representation to the public and the authority issuing it is bound by such representation and it cannot act contrary to the same. The admitted factual scenario in the case in hand is that on the cut off date the appellant-petitioner was not possessing the requisite Lineal Descendant Certificate for being considered under the dependant of Ex-servicemen category and, thus, she cannot be held to be eligible for being considered for appointment under the said category.
8. In view of the undisputed factual position and the settled legal position on the issue, no exception can be taken to the rejection of the candidature of the appellant-petitioner. Learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition and we do not find any error in the impugned judgment which may require interference.
3 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2018 18:55:55 :::
LPA-12-2018 - 4 -
9. The appeal is devoid of merits and accordingly stands dismissed.
(KRISHNA MURARI) CHIEF JUSTICE (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE 17.09.2018 parkash NOTE:
Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2018 18:55:55 :::