Shruti Chaudhary vs State Of Haryana And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 9403 P&H

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
                       Sr. No.: 118
                                                            Civil Writ Petition No.11349 of 2023
                                                                  Date of Decision: July 05, 2023


                       Shruti Chaudhary
                                                                             ..... PETITIONER(S)
                                                        VERSUS
                       State of Haryana & others
                                                                            ..... RESPONDENT(S)

                                                           ...

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

...

PRESENT: - Mr. Vaibhav S. Tara, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Additional Advocate General, Hayrana.

. . .

Tribhuvan Dahiya, J (Oral)

This petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus,

directing the respondents to rectify the Haryana Teacher Eligibility Test,

2022 (for short, 'HTET') result qua the petitioner, whereby she has been

declared not-qualified in Level 3-PGT (English) examination under General

Category.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

petitioner, though belonging to a Scheduled Caste, did not have the

certificate to that effect issued by the competent authority at the time of

filling up the form for the HTET examination, which was held on

03.12.2022. This prevented her from applying as a Scheduled Caste category

candidate for the test. The said certificate was issued to her on 06.12.2022

(Annexure P-13). The result of the test was published on 19.12.2022, AVIN KUMAR 2023.07.06 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment 2023:PHHC:083978

CWP No.11349 of 2023 [2]

wherein the petitioner scored 86 marks and was declared not-qualified.

Thereupon, she made a representation dated 23.12.2022 (Annexure P-15) to

the respondents requesting rectification of the result under the Scheduled

Caste category and considering her qualified, as the cut-off marks to qualify

the examination for this category were 82. The representation has been

rejected vide communication dated 09.01.2023 (Annexure P-16) on the

ground that the petitioner/candidate herself mentioned the 'category' and

'home state' at the time of filling up the form. Learned counsel contends that

the rejection is arbitrary and the petitioner, who undoubtedly belongs to a

Scheduled Caste category, deserves rectification of the result in view

thereof.

3. Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Additional Advocate General,

Haryana, appearing on advance notice, contends that there is no such

procedure to rectify the result once it has been declared. The petitioner has

herself filled up her category as 'General' and claimed her to be belonging to

'other State'. Only after declaration of the result she became wiser and came

up with the plea by filing the representation, dated 23.12.2022, which has

been rightly rejected.

4. The submissions made by learned counsel for the parties

have been considered.

5. Undoubtedly, the petitioner herself applied for taking HTET

examination as a General category candidate and claimed her to be

belonging to 'other State', not Haryana. The Scheduled Caste category

certificate, dated 06.12.2022, has been issued to her subsequently by the

concerned authority, and cannot have any effect on the examination that has

AVIN KUMAR already been held, and taken by the petitioner. Besides, the HTET 2023.07.06 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment 2023:PHHC:083978

CWP No.11349 of 2023 [3]

examination is held every year and the petitioner is at liberty to take the

exam again under the relevant category, as may be claimed by her. Since

there is no such procedure known to law whereby a result already declared

can be modified, that too on the basis of a certificate issued subsequently, no

exception can be taken to the impugned order rejecting the representation.

6. Dismissed.

                                                                       (Tribhuvan Dahiya)
                                                                             Judge
                       July 05, 2023
                       avin




                       Whether Speaking/ Reasoned:                         Yes/ No
                       Whether Reportable:                                 Yes/ No




AVIN KUMAR
2023.07.06 09:34
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this
order/judgment