Vikrant @ Vikrant Sharma vs State Of Haryana & Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 6998 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vikrant @ Vikrant Sharma vs State Of Haryana & Others on 3 April, 2024

Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi

Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi

                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044651



CM-4812-CWP-2024 in/and CWP-20970-2018                              1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                              2024:PHHC:044651

(103)                              CM-4812-CWP-2024 in/and
                                   CWP-20970-2018
                                   Date of Decision : April 03rd 2024


Vikrant @ Vikrant Sharma                                      .. Petitioner


                                   Versus

State of Haryana and others                                   .. Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:       Mr. Hardeep Singh Kasan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

               Mr. Harish Nain, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

CM-4812-CWP-2024

Present application has been filed for recalling the order dated

12.03.2024, by which, the present writ petition was dismissed for non-

prosecution.

Notice of the application to the counsel opposite.

Mr. Harish Nain, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana,

who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He

raises no objection for the grant of prayer as raised in the present

application.

Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which

are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. The order dated

12.03.2024 is recalled and the writ petition is restored to its original number

and status.

1 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044651

CWP-20970-2018

1. In the present writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is

that the petitioner had applied for the post of Ayurveda Medical Officer

(Male) in District Kaithal in pursuance to the Advertisement dated

29.06.2018 (Annexure P-3) but without making any recruitment, in

pursuance to the said advertisement, the respondents again advertised the

post of Ayurveda Medical Officer, which act of the respondents is totally

arbitrary and illegal.

2. The prayer of the petitioner is that as the petitioner was fully

eligible and was within the merit, the petitioner should have been appointed

on the post of Ayurveda Medical Officer in pursuance to the Advertisement

dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure P-3).

3. After notice of motion, the respondents have filed the reply

wherein, the respondents have stated that none of the candidate who had

applied, was found eligible to be appointed on the said post hence, no

appointment in pursuance to the Advertisement dated 29.06.2018

(Annexure P-3) was made and in case of the petitioner, he had only

produced the registration certificate (Annexure P-2) which is one of the

mandatory condition for appointment on the said post, which was only valid

upto 17.05.2017 whereas, the application filled by the petitioner was in July

2018.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

had got the registration with the Board of Ayurvedic and Unani Systems of

Medicine, Haryana (Annexure P-2) renewed and he was having a valid

registration on the date when he filled up the application form and in fact,

the renewed registration was attached along with the application form and

the averments made in the reply are incorrect.

2 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044651

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone

through the record with their able assistance.

6. The only question which arise is whether, the petitioner

established his eligibility in pursuance to the Advertisement dated

29.06.2018 (Annexure P-3) while filing up the application form and

whether, the stand taken by the respondents that none of the candidate was

found fit/eligible to be appointed on the post in question, is correct.

7. In order to verify the facts, the original application form of the

petitioner was summoned and perused. The said application form was also

shown to the learned counsel for the petitioner, from which, it is clear that

the registration certificate issued to the petitioner which was attached with

the application form was only valid upto May 2017. No other document was

attached along with the application form to prove the eligibility and the

respondent keeping in view the documents attached with the application

form, decided that the petitioner was ineligible for the post in question as he

was not having registration with Ayurvedic and Unani Systems of

Medicine, Haryana upto the last date of filling of the application form.

8. From the facts mentioned hereinbefore, it is clear that there was

nothing wrong with the decision of the respondents to scrap the selection

process in pursuance to the Advertisement dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure P-3)

as none of the candidate was found fit/eligible for the post of Ayurveda

Medical Officer.

9. The eligibility being claimed by the petitioner on the basis of

renewed registration with Ayurvedic and Unani Systems of Medicine,

Haryana (Annexure P-2), was never appended along with application form

though the same could have been easily done by attaching the renewed

registration certificate with the application form. As per the documents

3 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044651

attached with the application form, the petitioner was ineligible as his

registration with Ayurvedic and Unani Systems of Medicine, Haryana had

already expired on 17.05.2017, which is much prior to the last date of the

application form.

10. Further, as per the Advertisement dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure

P-3), all the documents which are to be relied upon by the applicant should

be attached with the application form with the attested photocopy of the said

certificate to prove the eligibility. It is clear that as per the certificate

attached by the petitioner with the application form, he could not be

declared eligible.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that as per the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.6072

of 2023 titled as Sweety Kumari vs. The State of Bihar and others, decided

on 22.09.2023, the petitioner should be treated eligible as once he already

had the registration certificate which was renewed, as the said certificate

was not necessary to be produced.

12. The reliance being placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court of India in Sweety Kumari's case (supra) is misplaced. In

the said judgment, the candidate had attached all the relevant documents

along with the application form but at the time of scrutiny, the original

certificate was not produced due to which, the candidature of the candidates

was cancelled whereas, in the present case, the documents which have been

attached with the application form show that the petitioner do not fulfill the

eligibility qualification prescribed for the post in question. That being so,

the benefit of judgment in Sweety Kumari's case (supra) as being claimed

by the petitioner cannot be extended to him.

13. No other argument was raised.

4 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044651

14. Keeping in view the above, no ground is made out for any

interference by this Court in the present writ petition.

15. Dismissed.

April 03rd 2024                  (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
harsha                                  JUDGE


             Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
             Whether reportable       : Yes/No




                                      5 of 5