Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rakhee Tangri And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 20 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039951
CWP-12161-2015 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:039951 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
213
WP-12161-2015 (O&M)
C
Date of decision: 20.03.2024
Rakhee Tangri and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
*****
Present : Mr. Abhijeet Singh Rawaley, Advocate
Mr. Sahil Mehndiratta, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Sr. Panel Counsel for UOI.
* ****
AMAN CHAUDHARY. J (ORAL)
1. The prayer inthepresentCivilWritPetitionfiledunderArticles
226/227 of the Constitution of India, is to issue a writ in the nature of
mandamus, for directing the respondents to regularize the service of the
petitionersagainstthevacantpostofAyurvedicMedicalOfficerslyingvacant
with the Government of Punjabandtograntagerelaxationandweightagein
the advertisement dated 07.05.2015.
2. Based on the reliance placed by learned counsel for the
petitioners upon CWP-11236-2015 titled as 'Dr. Amit Kumar Sidhu and
othersvs.StateofPunjabandothers',noticeofmotionhadbeenissuedinthe
presentcase,whichhassincebeendismissedbythisCourtandisreportedas
2016(1) S.C.T. 205, against which no LPA was filed and thus, has attained
finality.Copyofthejudgmenthasbeenproduced.Therelevantparaswhereof
read thus:
" 13.Onthemootissueofweightageofexperience,ifgiven,itis
manifest thatitwouldputtheopencandidateswhohaveapplied
for thepostofAyurvedicMedicalOfficertodisadvantageasthe
petitioners would get a head start with such weightage which
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039951
CWP-12161-2015 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:039951 2
ould destroy the claims of the general candidates as have
w
appliedtotheCommissiontocompeteforthosepostsonregular
basiswithintheadvertisedboundariesofopenmeritcompetition.
Itisseriouslyarguedthattheraceforpostsfromthestartinggun
to the tape and the merit finally determined among the eligible
competitors would get totally distorted in case a direction is
issued by the Court to the State Government to give weightage
towardsexperiencetothepetitioners.Ifsuchacourseisadopted
it would violate the equality clause in Article 14 of the
Constitution of India and disturb the equal opportunity law in
Article16theresultofwhichwouldbetoputunequalsonequal
footing, which the Constitution abhors.
1 4. There is another angle from where Mr. Sehgal canvasses
beforetheCourtinsofarastheclaimforweightageisconcerned,
urging that in case weightage is given, if directed, when the
Commission has all butdoneitswork,itwouldinevitablyresult
in nullification of the advertisement and the entire recruitment
process itself re-setting the clock fortheCommissiontomakea
fresh recruitment by fresh advertisement all over again for the
same posts/vacancies which have been advertised for direct
recruitment. This would lead to administrative chaos andwould
beagainstpublicinterestpreventingregularrecruitmentorinany
event postponing it to an unpredictable future date which is not
what regular recruitment is about. The scope of mandamus
jurisdiction in Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not
meant for such a purpose as would inevitably prejudice the
interest of the State and the publicatlarge.Amandamuswould
never lie to the Government to redesign a rule or rewrite it on
groundsofsympathyorcompassion.Ifthiswereallowedwecan
forget about making direct recruitment of Ayurvedic Medical
Officers for a long time. Besides, apart from the two persons
mentioned in the affidavit the rest have not made the mark on
merits in the written examination and therefore, they have no
case for appointment whatsoever or towards weightage of
experience and to overcome the age bar to enable them to be
interviewed.
1 9. In the said ruling the Supreme Court held that the
observations in Umadevi(3) were not applied in Nagendra
Chandra''scaseandtheobservationsinNagendraChandra''scase
cannot be said to be an exposition on ageneralprincipleoflaw
on the point that a long length of service de hors the relevant
factors for waiver or relaxation of any eligibility criterion
including age limit for futureregularselectionfortheposttobe
followed as binding dicta on principles of stare decisis. From
this, Mr. SehgalcontendsthatneitherthedirectionsinNagendra
Chandra''scasenorinSatyaParkash''scasecanbeappliedbythis
Court to consider relaxation in age contrary to rules of service
governingthepostsofAyurvedicMedicalOfficers.Therecanbe
no doubt on this point as to which way it should go and Mr.
SehgalappearsonsoundfootingwhenheurgesthisCourtnotto
interfere in the age bar by making any direction or approving
relaxation on this count irrespective of the length of service,
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039951
CWP-12161-2015 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:039951 3
hile arguing that his opposing counsel cannot succeed on this
w
point and because he cannot succeed on theissueofagebar,he
cannot succeed on the question of weightage of experience as
wellsinceitisnotprescribedintherulesofservicenorobviously
in the advertisement and thestandoftheStateintheconsidered
view of this Court deserves to be upheld as it is valid and
commendableviewofthelawonthefactsofthiscasewhichare
peculiar in nature.
2 0. Mere sympathy or compassion alone cannot come to the
rescue of the petitioners nor would any equity flow from the
interim orders passed by this Court to consider the cases on
merits as the arrangement to allow the over age candidates to
competeforthepostwasinterimandnoequitiesflowtherefrom.
Even if one or two of the candidates have been successful on
merits in the selection even then equitable principles cannot be
invoked in favour of any of the present candidates praying that
weightage of experience is to be given to them alone then why
should it not be given to all the candidates who have applied
under the advertisement. Any direction of the kind, I dare say,
would upset the entire apple cart and jeopardizetherecruitment
process itself throwing it off gear and in a tizzy impairing third
party rights to such a degree as would restrain thehandsofthis
Court from passing any orders favourable to the petitioners
despite long service in a scheme where the entry process was
qualitatively different from the one presently being pursued by
thePPSC,Patiala,onarequisitionoftheStateGovernmentinthe
Department of Health (Ayush).
2 1.Forthesereasons,thisCourtwouldbeloathtointerferewith
the recruitment process where it stands and which must nowbe
takentoitslogicalconclusionwithouttheburdensofthispetition
carried any further. If both or either of the two concessions are
given as claimed it would amount to reverse discriminationand
betray Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
22.Consequently,nogroundismadeoutwarrantinginterference
in writ jurisdiction and the petition is found without substance
and is thus dismissed."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to controvert the
aforesaid fact or cite any contrary law.
4. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY)
JUDGE
2 0.03.2024
Hemant
hether speaking/reasoned
W : es / No
Y
Whether reportable : Yes / No
3 of 3
