Punjab-Haryana High Court
Anil Kumar And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 2 June, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -1- 2023:PHHC:081289
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M)
Reserved on:10.05.2023
Pronounced on:02.06.2023
Anil Kumar and another ...Petitioners
Vs
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
2. CWP No.27292 of 2018 (O&M)
Ravinder Kumar ...Petitioner
Vs
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
3. CWP No.21908 of 2018 (O&M)
Pardeep Kumar ...Petitioner
Vs
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
4. CWP No.32398 of 2018 (O&M
Parveen Saroha ...Petitioner
Vs
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
5. CWP No.34119 of 2019 (O&M)
Ankit Malik and another ...Petitioner
Vs
Haryana State Selection Commission and another ...Respondents
6. CWP No.24062 of 2018 (O&M)
Neha ...Petitioner
Vs
Haryana State Selection Commission and another ...Respondents
7. CWP No.23047 of 2018 (O&M)
Vikas Dhiman ...Petitioner
Vs
1 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:081289
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
8. CWP No.20841 of 2018 (O&M)
Baljinder Kumar and others ...Petitioners
Vs
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Present: Mr. Jasbir Mor, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP No.22948 of 2018.
Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP No.23047 of 2018.
Mr. Ajay Vijarania, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP No.27292 of 2018.
Mr. Suresh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP No.21908 of 2018.
Mr. Jasbir Mor, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP No.32398 of 2018.
Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP No.34119 of 2019.
Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP No.24062 of 2018.
Mr. Sunil K. Nehra, Advocate
For the petitioners in CWP No.20841 of 2018.
Mr. Kapil Bansal, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Narinder Singh Behgal, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate
for respondent-HSAMB.
Mr. Saurabh Chawla, Advocate for
Mr. Nitin Kaushal, Advocate
for respondent No.3-AICTE.
Mr. Prateek Mahajan, Advocate and
Mr. Saloni Sharma, Advocate
for respondent No.2 in CWP No.32398 of 2018.
2 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -3- 2023:PHHC:081289
JAISHREE THAKUR J.
1. This order of mine shall dispose of eight writ petitions bearing CWP
Nos.22948, 23047, 21908, 24062, 27292, 32398, 20841 of 2018 and 34119
of 2019, as the grievance raised by the petitioner(s) in all the writ petitions is
that they have not been called for interview on the ground that they did not
possess requisite six months certificate in computer from a recognized
institution.
2. In brief, facts, which have led to the filing of the instant writ petition,
are that Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula (HSSC in short)
had published Advertisement No.7/2015 dated 10.07.2015 for direct
recruitment of various categories of posts as mentioned in the said
advertisement. In pursuance to the said advertisement, the petitioners in the
afore-captioned writ petitions had applied for various posts, details of which
are tabulated as under:-
CWP No.22948 of 2018
Name of the Advt. Cat. No. & Essential qualification Qualification of the
petitioner and No. name of post petitioner
Cat.
i) Anil Kumar 7/15 Cat No.19, i) Graduation i) B. Tech.
(General) Auction with 55% marks from ii) M. Tech
Recorder a recognised iii) Diploma in
University with six Computer
months certificate in Application from
computer from a Rashtriya Saksharta
recognised Mission IT
Institutions; and Education
ii) Hindi/Sanskrit upto iv) Diploma in
Matric Standard or Web Technology
higher education. from HARTRON
ii) Sunil Kumar
(dismissed as
not pressed)
CWP No.34119 of 2019
i) Ankit Malik As As above As above i) B.Com
(General) above (Vocational)
ii) Diploma in
Computer
3 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -4- 2023:PHHC:081289
Application from
Paras Computer
Education Centre
i) B.Com
ii) Diploma in
ii) Amit As As above As above Office
above Management from
Bharat Computer &
Management
Technology
CWP No.23047 of 2018
Vikas Dhiman As As above i) B.Tech
(OSP-BCA) above As above (Electrical &
Electronics
Engineering)
ii) Diploma
(Instrumentation &
Control from
Haryana State
Board of Technical
Education)
CWP No.20841 of 2018
i) Balinder As Cat. No.17, As above i) M.Sc.
Kumar (BCA above Mandi (Mathematics)
category) Supervisor- ii) 6 months
cum-Fee Diploma in Graphic
Collector Designing from C-
Point Computer
(Firm & Society
Haryana)
iii) 6 months
Diploma in
Enterprise
Networking from
Centre for
Development of
Advance
Computing)
ii) Amandeep
Singh (already
selected)
iii) Pankaj i) B.Tech
Kumar (BCA) (Mechanical
Engineering)
ii)Computer Course
from Tata Infotech
Education
iii) Foundation
Course on Autocad
from CADD
Centre,
Kurukshetra.
CWP No.27292 of 2018
Ravinder As As above As above i) Bachelor of
Kumar above Engineering
(General) (Electronics &
4 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -5- 2023:PHHC:081289
Comm. Engg.).
ii) Certificate
Course from Tata
Infotech (Jul 02 to
Apr 03)
iii) Certificate
course on Advance
C Programming,
Software Engg.
HTML and Modern
Telecommunication
CWP No.21908 of 2018
Pardeep Kumar As As above As above i) M.Tech
(BCA) Above (Electronics &
Comm. Engg.)
ii) B.Tech
(Electronics &
Comm. Engg.)
CWP No.32398 of 2018
Parveen Saroha As As above As above i) B. Com
(General) above (Vocational
Course)
CWP No.24062 of 2018
Neha As As above As above i) B.Tech
above (Electronics &
Comm.)
3. Petitioners herein being duly eligible in their respective categories of
posts submitted their online applications. Being successful in the written
examination conducted by the respondent-Commission, they were called for
scrutiny of documents. They appeared before the competent authorities for
scrutiny of documents and submitted requisite documents pertaining to their
qualifications. However, they were surprised to find that their names were
not reflected in the list of candidates called for the interview. They were
orally informed by the respondent-Commission that they did not possess the
requisite six months certificate in computer from a recognized institution
and therefore, they did not qualify for interview.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that they
have appended requisite certificates in computer to establish that they have
done their six months course in computer from registered institutes. It was
5 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -6- 2023:PHHC:081289
further argued that non-consideration of said certificates and subsequent
decision of the Haryana Staff Selection Commission in enlisting 16
institutions as recognized institutions for selection on posts in question
changes rules of the game after selection process put into motion and
therefore, petitioners herein are put at a disadvantage. It was also argued
that petitioners, who have done Bachelor of Technology have also studied
computer as a subject while pursuing their degree and therefore, the same
ought to have been taken into consideration as a qualification equivalent to
or higher than six months course in computer.
5. Additionally, learned counsel appearing for petitioner-Ankit Malik in
CWP No.34119 of 2019 and the counsel appearing for petitioner-Parveen
Saroha in CWP No.21908 of 2018 would argue that petitioners have done
their B.Com (Vocational Course) degree wherein they studied subjects of
Computer Fundamental & Logical Org-1, Computer Fundamental & Logical
Org-2, Fundamental of Database System-II, Data Structures and SAD CA6
& Data Structures & SAD CA 6 in semesters 1 to 6 respectively, which is
higher than a six months course in computer. Reliance has also been placed
upon a certificate issued by the Principal, Arya PG College, Panipat
(Annexure P-8) in favour of petitioner-Ankit Malik in CWP No.34119 of
2019 wherein it is stated that the petitioner has done Bachelor of Commerce
(Vocational) 3 years degree and contents of subjects studied is higher in
comparison to six months course in computer.
6. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners in CWP Nos.27292 of 2018
and 20841 of 2018 would argue that petitioners namely Ravinder Kumar and
Pankaj Kumar respectively have done their computer courses from Tata
Infotech, which had entered into an agreement with the Government of
6 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -7- 2023:PHHC:081289
Haryana for imparting computer education as an optional subject in the
Government Educational Institutes and therefore, their certificates ought to
have been considered as the one obtained from recognized institutions.
7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents
would urge that terms and conditions of the advertisement clearly mentioned
that only six months computer certificates issued by the recognized institutes
would be taken into consideration and therefore, there is no infirmity in the
selection process or not taking the computer certificates appended by the
petitioners into consideration, as they have been issued by registered
institutes and not by recognized institutes.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance
have gone through the pleadings of the case.
9. The facts are not in dispute that the petitioners herein had applied for
the posts of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee Collector and Auction Recorder
under Category Nos.17 and 19 respectively in pursuance to Advertisement
No.7/2015. For both the aforesaid posts, besides graduation with 55%
marks from a recognized University, a six months certificate in computer
from recognized institution is mandatory. In CWP No.20394 of 2018 titled
as Prince Vs. State of Haryana and others decided on 14.11.2018, a decision
taken on 07.09.2018 by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission with regard
to the institutions, which were to be considered as recognized institutions for
six months course in computer for the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee
Collector. Details of said 16 institutions are as under:-
"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
7 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -8- 2023:PHHC:081289
Operator issued by Skill Development and Industrial Tranining
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
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.
8 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -9- 2023:PHHC:081289
14. Computer Diploma issued by a College affiliated/ recognized to
University (framed under State Act/Central Act).
15. PGDCA issued by University.
16. Three years Diploma in Computer/IT from Polytechnic
recognized by Technical Education Department."
10. The question that needs consideration would be whether petitioners
herein, who have done their six months computer course from an institute,
which is though not recognized as one of the 16 institutes as enlisted by the
Haryana Staff Selection Commission, but stands duly registered, would be
eligible for the posts of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee Collector/Auction
Recorder? Secondly, would the action of the respondent-State in holding the
petitioners ineligible on account of not possessing a six months computer
certificate from any of the 16 institutions tantamount to changing rules of the
game after initiation of selection process.
11. In the opinion of this Court, answer of both the questions would be in
negative. The advertisement i.e. Advertisement No.7/2015 clearly specified
that the computer certificate would have to be issued from a 'recognized
institute' and not merely from a registered institute. It is worthwhile to note
that most institutes open after getting themselves registered, but do not
impart education and hand out certificates with impunity. No classes are
held, as there is no teaching staff nor any infrastructure. Most of these
institutes get registered, as it is easy to earn off the students, who are keen to
get a certificate without any actual education being imparted, whereas that is
not the case where institutes are recognized by the State Government itself.
Computer education is of practical nature and therefore, action of the
respondent-State in short-listing institutions as recognized institutions,
9 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -10- 2023:PHHC:081289
which impart computer education while fulfilling the parameters of
qualification of faculty imparting education, number of computers, number
of class rooms with basic needs as well as the infrastructure and are actually
authorized to issue certificates, cannot be said to be changing rules of game
after initiation of selection process. Petitioners have no locus to say that
their non-selection has been impacted on account of changing rules of game
midway, since they themselves do not possess six months certificate in
computer from a 'recognized institute'. Employer has absolute right to
adjudge the suitability of the candidates whom they want to select for
running administration. Therefore, petitioners herein, who do not possess
six months certificate in computer from any of the 16 institutes as held to be
recognized institutions for selection to the posts in question by the Haryana
Staff Selection Commission, cannot be considered to be eligible.
12. The argument raised by counsel appearing for the petitioners in CWP
Nos.27292 of 2018 and 20841 of 2018 that petitioners namely Ravinder
Kumar and Pankaj Kumar respectively have done their computer courses
from Tata Infotech and their certificates are issued by government
educational institutions, therefore they have to be held eligible, is not
sustainable. In the judgment rendered a Coordinate Bench of this Court in
CWP No.16953 of 2009 titled as Karam Singh Vs. State of Haryana and
others decided on 06.11.2009, which has been upheld upto Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India, it has been held as under:-
"Merely because the Tata Infotech Limited has entered into an
agreement (Annexure P-2) with the Government of Haryana, for
imparting computer education as an optional subject in the
Government Educational Institutions (Schools, Colleges, Industrial
10 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -11- 2023:PHHC:081289
Training Institutions and Vocational Education Institutions) for short
duration of computer courses, will not make the certificates
(Annexures P-3 and P-4), issued by the Tata Infotech Limited, during
that training, as a valid one year Diploma in computer.
These certificates have been issued for participation in
computer training for a duration of 90 and 120 hours. The students,
who are studying in Government Education Institutions attended those
courses as an optional subject and they were given the certificates for
that. Those certificates are not equivalent to one year Diploma in
computer, which itself is a separate course. During the course of
arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner could not show any
material/order that those certificates have been recognized by the
Government as equivalent to one year Diploma course in computer. In
absence of any such recognition by the Government, it cannot be held
that those certificates issued by Tata Infotech Limited with counter
signatures of the Principal of the College, can be considered as
equivalent to one year Diploma in computer. Similar is the position
with regard to the certificate (Annexure P-5) issued by the Webs
Computer Education. Therefore, in my opinion, the petitioner has
been rightly held to be not entitled for appointment on the post of
Field Inspector (Stores) in Hafed, as he is not possessing the essential
minimum qualification i.e. one year Diploma in computer.
13. In view of the aforesaid fact, certificates issued by Tata Infotech
Limited cannot be taken into consideration.
14. The argument raised by counsel appearing for petitioners that some of
the petitioners have done their B.Tech with computer as one of the subjects
11 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -12- 2023:PHHC:081289
and therefore, the same ought to have been taken into consideration looks
attractive, but equivalence of a qualification is not a matter which can be
determined by this Court in exercise of its judicial review. For instance, in
CWP No.24062 of 2018, petitioner did B.Tech in Electronics and
Communication Engineering with Fundamental of Computer and
Programming, Computer Programming Lab and Data Structures and
Computer Design Hardware in 3rd and 5th Semester respectively. In CWP
No.21908 of 2018, petitioner-Pardeep Kumar while doing his B.Tech
(Electronics & Communication Engineering) studied Fundamentals Of
Computer & Programming, Computer Programming Lab, Computer
Communications, Computer Architecture & Organ, Computer Networks IT
and Data Communication as subjects related to computer in 1st, 3rd, 5th, 6th
and 7th Semester. Similarly, petitioners in CWP No.32398 of 2018 and
34119 of 2019 have done B.Com with vocational course and studied
Computer Fundamental & Logical Org, Fundamental of Database System,
CAD and Advanced Computer Application as subjects in 1st to 6th semesters
respectively. Determination of equivalence of any qualification is domain of
experts and therefore, this Court restrains itself from going into the issue
whether the subjects studied by petitioners as mentioned above would be
equivalent to six months course in computer as required under the
advertisement. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U.P.P.S.C.
through its Chairman v. Rahul Singh, 2018 AIR (Supreme Court) 2861
has held, "Judges are not and cannot be experts in all fields and, therefore,
they must exercise great restraint and should not overstep their jurisdiction
to upset the opinion of the experts." It would be appropriate to refer to the
judgments as rendered by the Supreme Court to the effect that the courts
12 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -13- 2023:PHHC:081289
should refrain from giving their own opinion over and above the opinion
given by an Expert Committee. The judgements of the Supreme Court in this
regard are Kanpur University through Vice Chancellor and others v. Samir
Gupta and others (1983) 4 SCC 309, Rishal and others v. Rajasthan Public
Service Commission and others (2018) 8 SCC 81, Uttar Pradesh Public
Service Commission, through its Chairman and another v. Rahul Singh
and another (2018) 7 SCC 254 and Sarita Meena v. State of Rajasthan
2021 (1) RLW 650. The Division Bench of Delhi High Court in National
Board Of Examination v. Association Of Md Physicians, 2022 AIR
(Delhi) 246, has also recently held that Judges are not and cannot be experts
in all fields, and the opinion of experts cannot be supplanted by a Court
overstepping its jurisdiction.
15. At this juncture, this Court also takes note of the fact that in CWP
No.13609 of 2020 titled as Vikas Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others, this
Court, with consent of parties, vide interim order dated 11.01.2023 had sent
the matter to the Registrar of MDU, Rohtak to constitute an expert
committee to examine the issue of equivalence of study of computer
education as done by the petitioners during their B.Sc. course with six
months computer certificate as required under the same advertisement i.e.
Advertisement No.7/2015. Pursuant thereto, Registrar, MDU submitted his
report dated 17.02.2023, which has not been challenged till today. The
relevant part of the said report is reproduced as under:-
"...After perusal of the DMCs in r/o Mr. Vikas Singh, one of the
petitioners who has passed B.Sc. with Computer Science as a subject
from KUK (State University recognized by UGC) as well as the copy
of the advertisement, List of Computer Diplomas for the post etc., the
13 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -14- 2023:PHHC:081289
Committee after detailed deliberation was of the considered opinion
and recommended that any student with B.Sc. having studied
Computer Science/Computer Application/IT subject or equivalent
subject may be considered as equivalent to six months Computer
Course Certificate required for the said post(s), which is also covered
in the List of Courses mentioned at Sr. No.5 in the above-said memo
as well as in the Advt."
16. Similarly, since it is the contention of the counsel for the petitioners
that they have a higher qualification, having studied computer in the degree
course for six months or more, the matter ought to be placed before an
expert body to look into the issue. Possessing higher qualification cannot be
held against the petitioners by declaring them ineligible on the ground that
they did not possess a six months certificate in computer.
17. In view of the aforesaid findings rendered by this Court, the ultimate
result of the writ petitions is as under:-
CWP No.22948 Dismissed.
of 2018
CWP No.34119 Disposed of. Qua petitioner No.1-Ankit Malik,
of 2019 Respondents are directed to reconsider the qualification of
petitioner by obtaining an expert opinion (Registrar,
MDU as has been done in CWP No. 13609 of 2020) with
regard to equivalence of subjects studied by him in
B.Com (vocational course) with six months course in
computer within a period of two weeks from receipt of
certified copy of this order and if found eligible and
meritorious, his name be recommended for appointment
to the post Auction Recorder by HSSC to the concerned
department and appointment letter be issued to him
forthwith. Needless to say that the petitioner will be
entitled for all notional benefits.
Petitioner No.2-Amit is held ineligible in the absence of
detailed mark sheets establishing that he did his B.Com
with vocational course.
CWP No.23047 Disposed of. Respondents are directed to reconsider the
of 2018 qualification of petitioner by obtaining an expert opinion
14 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -15- 2023:PHHC:081289
(Registrar, MDU as has been done in CWP No. 13609 of
2020) with regard to equivalence of subjects studied by
him in B.Tech (Electrical & Electronics Engineering) as
well as the Diploma done by him in Instrumentation &
Control Engineering from Seth Jai Parkash Polytechnic,
Damla (Yamuna Nagar) issued by Haryana State Board of
Technical Education with six months course in computer
within a period of two weeks from receipt of certified
copy of this order and if found eligible and meritorious,
his name be recommended for appointment to the post
Auction Recorder by HSSC to the concerned department
and appointment letter be issued to him forthwith.
Needless to say that the petitioner will be entitled for all
notional benefits.
CWP No.20841 Dismissed.
of 2018
CWP No.27292 Dismissed. Detailed marksheets depicting subjects
of 2018 studied not attached.
CWP No.21908 Disposed of. Respondents are directed to reconsider the
of 2018 qualification of petitioner by obtaining an expert opinion
with regard to equivalence of subjects studied by him in
B.E. (Electronic & Communication Engineering) with six
months course in computer within a period of two weeks
from receipt of certified copy of this order and if found
eligible and meritorious, his name be recommendation for
appointment to the post Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee
Collector by HSSC to the concerned department and
appointment letter be issued to him forthwith. Needless
to say that the petitioner will be entitled for all notional
benefits.
CWP No.32398 Disposed of. Respondents are directed to reconsider the
of 2018 qualification of petitioner by obtaining an expert opinion
with regard to equivalence of subjects studied by him in
B.Com (vocational course) with six months course in
computer within a period of two weeks from receipt of
certified copy of this order and if found eligible and
meritorious, his name be recommendation for
appointment to the post Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee
Collector by HSSC to the concerned department and
appointment letter be issued to him forthwith. Needless
to say that the petitioner will be entitled for all notional
benefits.
CWP No.24062 Disposed of. Respondents are directed to reconsider the
of 2018 qualification of petitioner by obtaining an expert opinion
with regard to equivalence of subjects studied by him in
B.Com (vocational course) with six months course in
computer within a period of two weeks from receipt of
certified copy of this order and if found eligible and
meritorious, his name be recommendation for
appointment to the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee
Collector by HSSC to the concerned department and
15 of 16
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
CWP No. 22948 of 2018 (O&M) -16- 2023:PHHC:081289
appointment letter be issued to her forthwith. Needless to
say that the petitioner will be entitled for all notional
benefits.
(JAISHREE THAKUR)
JUDGE
June 02, 2023
Pankaj*
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081289
16 of 16
