Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: selection process completed in Pardeep Kumar And Others vs The State Of Haryana & Others on 3 February, 2009Matching Fragments
was never issued. Thereafter, two Battalions of the said force were sanctioned by the Government and by an advertisement dated 5.2.2004, 1400 posts of Constables were advertised by the Director General of Police Haryana and 1339 persons appointed. Before the said appointments were finalized, three more Battalions were sanctioned and advertisements dated 23.7.2004 and 24.7.2004 for recruitment of 2050 Constables were announced. On 2.8.2004, the Director General of Police approved a proposal to send a requisition for recruitment of 71 male and 9 female Sub Inspectors through the Haryana Staff Selection Commission. A note dated 30.7.2004 had recorded that the Government had sanctioned 100 posts of Sub Inspectors for the Haryana State Industrial Security Force (for short "the Force") and that apart from that 50 posts were also sanctioned for 2 IRB Battalions, and that 13 posts in GRPF and 7 posts of S.Is in Gurgaon Range were lying vacant. Consequently, a requisition for 80 posts of Sub Inspectors for direct recruitment in Haryana police including IRB and the Force was sent. The said posts were advertised by an advertisement dated 7.9.2004. After completing the selection process, the Haryana Staff Selection Commission recommended the names of 69 candidates by letter dated 17.12.2004. It needs to be kept in mind that the Election Model Code of Conduct came into force in Haryana on 17.12.2004 which happened to be a Friday. Notwithstanding this fact the recommendation was processed and appointment orders were issued on 19.12.2004.
mentioned and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in the shape of affidavit or otherwise......"
In the case of State of Punjab and others vs Harcharan Singh and others' (supra), the dispute was with regard to posts of Lascars wherein selection process was completed but appointment letters could not be issued because of promulgation of the Model Code of Conduct. In those circumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held as follows :-