Punjab-Haryana High Court
Yoginder Singh Malik vs State Of Haryana And Others on 10 July, 2024
CWP-181-2022 (O&M) 1 2024 BHHC OS fa7o IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.252-2 CWP-181-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.07.2024 Yoginder Singh Malik .... 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 MANINDER CWP No.18482 of 2020. Written examination for the post was held on I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-181-2022 (O&M) 2024 BHHC OS fa7o 31.01.2021, and the result was declared on 23.02.2021, Annexure P-4. After 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 122 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 a DESM-GEN category post for want of eligibility certificate; the certificate submitted by him was dated 17.09.2008, 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 14.08.2006, Annexure P-8, 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 17.09.2008, Annexure R-2. 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 MANINDER . . . . .
2024.08.02 10:16 = @xamination and was called for scrutiny of documents as well as interview. attest to the accuracy an order/judginent.
CWP-181-2022 (O&M) 3 2024 BHHC OS fa7o Despite being meritorious, the only reason he could not be recommended 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 the 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 17.09.2008.
7. Record of selection concerning the petitioner was also produced, which shows that the only eligibility certificate submitted by the petitioner in support of his claim to be considered under DESM-GEN category was a certificate dated 17.09.2008 (bearing no.1039088-F), which was issued after the cut-off date. Besides, an application given by the petitioner dated 14.03.2021 is also a part of record; it is to the effect that his eligibility certificate is dated 17.09.2008; and in case he has any certificate issued by the Zila Sainik Board prior to the cut-off date, 21.08.2006, the same would be produced within three days, failing which his candidature may be cancelled.
8. Since the only eligibility certificate submitted by the petitioner in support of his claim was dated 17.09.2008, the same having been issued after the cut-off date, 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.
MANINDER 2024.08.02 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.CWP-181-2022 (O&M) 9 In view thereof, the petition stands dismissed being devoid of merit.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA) JUDGE 10.07.2024 Maninder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANINDER 2024.08.02 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.