Parveen Punia vs State Of Haryana And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1567 P&H

                 LPA No. 1128 of 2022 (O&M)                   1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                Letters Patent Appeal No. 1128 of 2022 (O&M)
                                            Date of Decision: 24.01.2023

 Parveen Punia                                               .....Appellant
                     versus

 State of Haryana and others                                 .....Respondents

CORAM:      HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI SHANKER JHA, CHIEF JUSTICE
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE

Present :   Mr. D.S.Patwalia, Senior Advocate with
            Ms. Sehar Navjeet Singh Sandhu, Advocate, for the appellant.

            Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana.

            Mr. Rajesh Hooda, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

            Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Advocate, for respondent-UGC.

            Mr. Amit Rao, Advocate for
            Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for respondent No.6.

                                         ****

RAVI SHANKER JHA, CHIEF JUSTICE (oral)

This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by

an order and judgment dated 07.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge

in Civil Writ Petition No. 2510 of 2017 (being the lead case) and other

connected matters.

Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the

learned Single Judge vide the impugned order and judgment set-aside the

decision of the respondent-State dated 06.01.2017, vide which the

candidates, who possessed Post Graduate degree in Genetics or Human

Genetics, were treated eligible for appointment to the post of Assistant

Professor in Zoology/Botany and consequently the selection of the appellant

was also set-aside being contrary to the rules as also the terms and

conditions of the advertisement dated 16.02.2016.

Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that there were

documents on record which indicate that the expert body of the authorities

had examined the matter and declared the qualifications possessed by the 1 of 2

appellant to be equivalent to the qualifications notified in the advertisement.

The appellant has also filed a Civil Miscellaneous Application No.

2740-LPA of 2022 in this appeal for bringing on record documents

Annexures A-1 to A-13 in support of his submissions and has also placed

reliance on document Annexure R-2/1 filed by the respondents wherein the

Assistant Director (Admission) had taken a decision to the effect that the

qualifications were equivalent. A separate ground in this regard has also

been taken in this appeal.

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, it is observed

that the question as to whether the documents, that are being relied upon by

the appellant and are sought to be placed on record through CM No. 2740-

LPA of 2022, were part of the record or not and whether or not they were

brought to the notice of the Court during the hearing, are the issues that can

be looked into by the learned Single Judge, who heard the matter. Likewise,

the question as to whether the document Annexure R-2/1, upon which the

reliance is sought to be placed, was brought to the notice of the learned

Single Judge or not, is also not borne out from the record.

In the circumstances, we consider it expedient and appropriate,

the appellant, if aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge,

moves an application before the learned Single Judge for review/appropriate

orders by bringing all these facts to the notice of the Court.

With the aforesaid observations, the appeal filed by the

appellant stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(RAVI SHANKER JHA) CHIEF JUSTICE

(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE 24.01.2023 ravinder Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whetherreportable Yes/No√

2 of 2