Punjab-Haryana High Court
Santosh Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Others on 7 December, 2022
(254) CWP No.15391 of 2020 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-15391-2020
Date of decision : 07.12.2022.
Santosh Kumar
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.. Respondents
CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
Present:- Mr. Surender Pal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Narender Singh Behgal, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Kinshu Mittal, Advocate for
Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate for respondent No.3/HSAMB.
***
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J. (Oral)
The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint
him to the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee Collector.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who
had applied for the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee Collector (category
No.17) against advt. No.07/2015, had secured 110 marks in ESM (General)
category while the last selected candidate in this category had secured 101
marks. The petitioner meets the eligibility criteria including six months
computer course which he had done at Thapar Institute of Engineering and
Technology. A copy of the certificate is at Annexure P-8. The respondents have
erroneously rejected the candidature of the petitioner although the aforesaid
Institute is a deemed University and in the list of recognized institutes/colleges
affiliated to the Universities constituted under the State/Central Act finds
1 of 5
mention. The petitioner had earlier preferred a writ petition bearing CWP
No.21885 of 2018 which was disposed of along with CWP No.20394 of 2018
on 14.11.2018 in view of the reply filed by the respondents wherein the list of
recognized Institutes had been set out.
Learned State counsel, however, submits that the Thapar Institute
of Engineering and Technology, is not a recognized Institute and does not find
mention in the list which had been submitted before this Court in CWP
No.20394 of 2018 including CWP No. 21885 of 2018, on 14.11.2018. This list
is also set out in the reply filed by respondent No.2. He, upon instructions, also
submits that there is no vacant post under the ESM (General) category while 13
posts under EBPGC category have been kept vacant in pursuance to the order
passed by this Court in another matter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of
a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of the Sumit versus Haryana
Staff Selection Commission, bearing CWP No.10860 of 2020, decided on
05.10.2021 wherein it had been held that in case no vacancy is available, a
supernumerary post may be created to be adjusted in future vacancy.
Heard.
The petitioner had applied for the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-
Fee Collector in response to the advertisement No.7/2015, dated 10.07.2015,
issued by the respondents on 10.07.2015 (Annexure P-1) wherein 126 post of
Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee Collector have been advertised on Category No.17
stating the following essential qualifications:-
" i) Graduation with 55% marks from a recognized University with
six months certificate in computer from a recognized Institution;
and
2 of 5
ii) Hindi/Sanskrit upto Matric Standard or higher education."
The petitioner was declared ineligible on account of not having the
requisite six months's certificate in computer course. He, thereafter, preferred
CWP No. 21885 of 2018 which was disposed of along with CWP No. 20394 of
2018, on 14.11.2018, on furnishing a list of the Institutes by the State which
were recognized for computer courses for the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-
Fee Collector. The petitioner had been provisionally interviewed in terms of
the interim order passed by this Court in CWP No.20394 of 2018. The
petitioner had obtained 102 marks in the written examination and 08 marks in
the interview, making it a total of 110 marks. The last selected candidate in
ESM (General) category has obtained 101 marks. The list of the Institutes
which are recognized for conducting the computer course is reproduced
hereunder:-
"01. One year Diploma for Computer Operator and Programming
Assistant, Desk Top Publishing Operator, Computer Hardware and
Network Maintenance and six month Diploma of Data Entry
Operator issued by Skill Development and Industrial Training
Department.
02. Certificate Course (144 hours) of C-DAC.
03. Certificate Course of HKCL.
04. Certificate Course of HARTRON.
05. All Engineering Degree/Bachelor Degree/Master Degree
(different nomenclature) in Computer/Computer
Engineering/Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer
Application e.g. B.Tech/BE/B.Sc. Engg./BCA/B.SC./Masters in
Computer/Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer
Application recognized for AICTE/UGC.
06. HARTRON Diploma in Financial Accounting with
HARTRON Skill Centre.
07. Diploma/Computer Course from District Council for Child
3 of 5
Welfare.
08. Diploma/Computer Course from Red Cross Society.
09. Diploma/Computer Course from National Institute of Skill
Development (NISD) approved from MHRD/Any State
Government.
10. Diploma/Computer Course from District Rural Development
Agency (DRDA).
11. Diploma/Computer Course from NIELIT (Ministry of IT,
Govt. of India).
12. Diploma/Computer Course from any wing of Indian Force
(Army/Air Force/Navy).
13. Diploma/Computer Course from ET&T Corporation Ltd.
14. Computer Diploma issued by a College
affiliated/recognized to University (framed under State
Act/Central Act). (emphasis supplied)
15. PGDCA issued by University.
16. Three years Diploma in Computer/IT from Polytechnic
recognized by Technical Education Department."
Item No.14 of the aforesaid list stipulates that the computer
diploma issued by the colleges affiliated to or recognized by the Universities
framed under the State or Central Act would be considered valid.
The petitioner had completed six months' course in Computer
Programming (DOS, Windows, FOXPRO, Basic and MS office) from Thapar
Institute of Engineering and Technology. The Thapar Institute of Engineering
and Technology had been declared as a deemed to be University under Section
3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 vide letter No.F.9-12/84-U.3
dated 30.12.1985 as mentioned in Annexure P-10.
Therefore, the six months computer course undertaken by the
petitioner would meet the qualification set out in the advertisement. The
petitioner has secured 110 marks while the last selected candidate in ESM
4 of 5
(General) category has secured 101 marks. In response to a query of this Court
as to whether any post is vacant, learned State counsel submits that there is no
post under the ESM (General) category while 13 posts in EBPGC category
have been kept vacant in pursuance to the order passed by this Court in another
matter.
The appointments in pursuance to the selection are stated to have
been made in the year 2019. I find it inequitable to oust a selected candidate
after three years. This Court in the cases of Sumit versus Haryana Staff
Selection Commission (supra) and Vikram versus State of Haryana and
others, bearing CWP No.9637 of 2021, decided on 25.08.2022 had in
somewhat similar circumstances directed that in case no vacancy is available, a
supernumerary post be created to be adjusted in future vacancy.
Consequently, the petition is allowed and the respondents are
directed to adjust/appoint the petitioner to the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-
Fee Collector against the supernumerary post to be created against a future
vacancy. The petitioner will also be entitled to the notional benefits from the
date other successful candidates had been appointed against the said post after
redetermining his merit. The needful will be done within a month from the
date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL)
JUDGE
December 07, 2022
sonia gugnani
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
5 of 5
