Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sunita Rani And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 28 April, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060683
118 2023:PHHC:060683
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh
Civil Writ Petition No. 646 of 2023
Date of Decision: 28.04.2023
Sunita Rani and Others
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and Others
... Respondent(s)
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.
Present: Mr. Parvesh K. Saini, Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
Mr. R.K.Kapoor, Additional Advocate General,
Punjab, for the respondents.
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
1. In substance, the grievance of the petitioners is to the effect that
the respondents have failed to shift meritorious Reserve Category
Candidates in the merit list prepared for the open category, as per the well
settled law and the policy instructions adopted by the State on 25.09.2017.
In order to apprehend the controversy involved in the present case, the
following relevant facts are required to be noticed.
2. On 08.01.2022, a recruitment notice to recruit 4161 posts of
Masters in different streams/subjects was issued. In the present case, the
selection to 790 posts of Masters in the English and Maths subjects is in
dispute. The selection was based on the marks obtained in the written test.
After result of written test was declared, the candidates were called for
counselling w.e.f. 20.10.2022. After completing the counselling i.e. checking
of the documents produced by the candidates, merit list was required to be
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060683
2023:PHHC:060683
prepared. The respondents, simultaneously, prepared the merit list of the
open category and various reserved categories including vertical as well as
horizontal. It was found that the posts of ex-servicemen (general) as well as
the sports (general) categories as shown are not available. In the subjects of
English as well as Mathematics, a decision was taken to unreserve those
posts which remained unfilled and filled through open category.
3. At the first stage, the recruiting agency has followed the
instructions issued by the State on 25.09.2019 in order to adjust the
meritorious reserved category candidates against the open category if their
marks are more than the last selected general category candidate. However,
with regard to the post/vacancy which became available on account of
conversion from the reserved category to the open category, the recruiting
agency has refused to follow the same procedure.
4. The learned State counsel, on the instructions from Mr.
Harpreet Singh, Assistant Director, Office of the Director General School
Education, Punjab, admits that the process for preparing the merit list as
well as the unfilled vacancies to open category was taken on the same day
and the subsequent list was also prepared on the same day.
5. The learned State counsel has relied upon the judgment passed
in Rajiv Mittal v. Maharshi Dayanand University (1998)2 SCC 402 to
contend that the State is required to follow the aforesaid procredure only at
the time of preparation of the first merit list and in the subsequent merit list.
6. This Court has carefully examined the judgment passed in
Rajiv Mittal's (supra). This judgment relates to the admission in an
educational institution. In that case, the students were allocated the various
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060683
2023:PHHC:060683
colleges/institutions. Subsequently, certain seats became available. It was in
those facts, the Supreme Court held that the procedure followed was not
erroneous. However, in the present case, the select list of the original open
category as well as the unfilled converted posts was prepared on the same
day. Hence, the only exercise which was required to be undertaken was to
prepare a fresh list because no appointment letter has been issued at that
time.
7. The learned State counsel also admits that no candidate has
been permitted to join pursuant to the selection.
8. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the State of Punjab is
directed to prepare a consolidated list of the open category as well as the
post which have become available on account of conversion of the unfilled
posts and carry out the exercise afresh.
9. With the observations, the present writ petition is disposed of.
(Anil Kshetarpal)
Judge
April 28, 2023
"DK"
Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060683
3 of 3
