Punjab-Haryana High Court
Haryana Staff Selection ... vs Monika And Others on 17 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
LPA Nos. 1355 and 1361 of 2019 (O & M)
LPA No. 886 of 2020 (O & M)
LPA No. 10 of 2021 (O & M)
Date of Decision: 17.03.2022
Haryana Staff Selection Commission ...........Appellant(s)
vs.
Monika and others ..........Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
Present:- Mr. Hitesh Pandit,Addl. A.G., Haryana
for the appellant.
Mr. Amit Rao, Advocate,
for the University.
(Proceedings are being conducted through video conferencing,
as per instructions).
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral)
The present judgment shall dispose of 4 appeals i.e. LPA Nos.
1355 and 1361 of 2019, LPA No. 886 of 2020 and LPA No. 10 of 2021 as
common questions of facts and law are involved in all the appeals. Reference is
being made to LPA No. 1355 of 2019, Haryana Staff Selection Commission
vs. Monika and others.
Refiling Applications
Applications for condonation of delay ranging from 235 to 555
days in refiling the appeals are allowed, in view of the averments made in the
applications supported by affidavit.
Delay ranging from 235 to 555 days in refiling the appeals is
condoned.
Applications stand disposed of.
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-LPA-1355-2019 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURMEET
SINGH SANDHAWALIA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
1 of 3
LPA No. 1355 of 2019 (O & M) and other connected matters -2-
Filing Applications
Applications for condonation of delay of 20 days in filing the
appeals are allowed, in view of the averments made in the applications
supported by affidavit.
Delay of 20 days in filing the appeals is condoned.
Applications stand disposed of.
Main Appeals
The present set of appeals are directed against the separate orders
passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 6524 of 2017, Arjun Singh and
another vs. State of Haryana and others decided on 05.09.2018, CWP No. 2731
of 2017, Vineet vs. State of Haryana and others decided on 05.09.2018 and
CWP No. 4471 of 2017, Himanshu Sharma vs. State of Haryana and others
decided on 10.08.2018.
In principle, the learned Single Judge as such had allowed the writ
petitions on the ground that the confidential result which was given by the
University to the candidates/applicants before the cut off date should be taken
into consideration. The view was taken on account of the decision in CWP No.
27021 of 2016, Priyanka and others vs. State of Haryana and others decided
on 23.10.2017. Reliance was also placed upon LPA No. 362 of 2018, Haryana
Staff Selection Commission vs. Priyanka and others decided on 10.10.2018,
which had upheld the said view.
It is a matter of record that the said view as such has been further
upheld by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 5065-5095 of 2021, Haryana
Staff Selection Commission vs. Priyanka and others on 01.09.2021. Relevant
portion of the same reads thus:-
"The short question which was raised before the
LPA No. 1355 of 2019 (O & M)
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-LPA-1355-2019 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURMEET
SINGH SANDHAWALIA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
2 of 3
and other connected matters -3-
High Court and also before us is as to whether the
provisional/confidential result declared by the Universities
would be a validly declared result or not. The question has
been considered by the High Court in detail and it has been
held in favour of the candidates. In our view also, as long
as the authenticity of the provisional/confidential result
declared by the Universities is not in doubt, which in the
present case has been confirmed by the Universities on the
request made by the appellant/commission, the view taken
by the High Court is perfectly justified. It cannot be said
that the respondents were not qualified as on the cut off
date, which was 12.10.2015, as the provisional/confidential
result had been declared by the respective Universities in
favour of the candidates prior to the said date and the
applications were filed by the respondents well within time,
along with such provisional/confidential result. As such, to
this extent, we are not inclined to interfere with the order
impugned in these appeals."
Counsel for the State very fairly concedes that in view the above,
the present appeals are liable to be dismissed.
Ordered accordingly.
All pending applications are also disposed of accordingly.
(G.S. SANDHAWALIA)
JUDGE
17.03.2022 (VIKAS SURI)
shivani JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-LPA-1355-2019 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURMEET
SINGH SANDHAWALIA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
3 of 3
