Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ajay Singh vs State Of Haryana Etc on 9 December, 2014
Author: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
Bench: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.22216 of 2011
Date of decision:09.12.2014
Ajay Singh ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana & others ... respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present: Mr. Devender Punia, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
Mr. H.N. Mehtani, Advocate and
Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate for respondent No.3/HPSC.
.....
TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J.
The Haryana Public Service Commission issued an advertisement dated 28.10.2009 (Annexure P-1) inviting applications from eligible candidates for recruitment to 475 temporary posts of Lecturers (College Cadre) in various subjects in the Haryana Education Department.
The instant petition has been filed impugning the action of the respondent/Commission in issuing a notice dated 25.07.2011 (Annexure P-5), which was in the nature of an announcement that candidates, who had enrolled for Ph.D. degree on or before 31.05.2009 would also be considered eligible for exemption as regards requirement of minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET for recruitment to the post of Lecturer (College Cadre) and who acquired such degree upto the date of conduct of the interview in the particular subject. Further prayer in the instant petition is for quashing the result/select list dated 20.10.2011 at Annexure P-7 on HARJEET KAUR 2014.12.15 01:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No.22216 of 2011 -2- the premise that candidates have been selected who were not eligible as per the initial advertisement.
During the course of hearing, counsel for the parties are ad idem that this Court on an earlier occasion in CWP No.18254 of 2011 titled as Dr. Sneh Lata Sharma Vs. Haryana Public Service Commission & others decided on 21.02.2013 and reported as 2013 (1) Law Herald 659 had examined the validity of such subsequent public notice dated 25.07.2011 issued by the Commission and had upheld the same.
Consequently, the issue and controversy raised in the instant writ petition is found to be covered against the petitioner in the light of judgment rendered by this Court in Dr. Sneh Lata Sharma's case (supra).
Petition dismissed.
December 09, 2014 (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)
harjeet JUDGE
HARJEET KAUR
2014.12.15 01:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document