Reservation benefit requires application under reserved category with valid certificate; recruitment rules prevail over advertisement on qualifications; non-applicants lack locus to challenge selections; delay bars merit claims in general category.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Petitioner, Baljinder Kaur, initially filed CWP No.7643 of 2010 before this Court and upon establishment of State Administrative Tribunal, the matter was transferred as T.A. No.2636 of 2015, and after the abolition of Learned Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court, as CWPOA No.1968 of 2019, seeking the following relief(s):—

(i). That appointment of the respondent No.4 issued vide Office Order dated 24.10.2010 (Annexure P-8) may kindly be quashed and set aside and respondents may be directed to appoint the petitioner as Punjabi Teacher in Government Senior Secondary School, Majari, District Bilaspur with all consequential benefits.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Grievance of the petitioner is that she is working is Punjabi Teacher, under PTA in GSSS Majari, District Bilaspur. It is averred that 06 posts of Punjabi Teachers were advertised on 06.08.2010 [Annexure P-7] on period basis by Deputy Director of Education, Bilaspur out of which one post was reserved for OBC category. In this backdrop, it is stated that the petitioner being an OBC, had applied for the post of Punjabi Teacher from OBC category but the private respondent No.4 [Daljeet Singh] was selected and the non-selection of the petitioner as Punjabi Teacher against reserved OBC post was claimed to be illegal.

STAND OF RESPONDENTS IN THE REPLY-AFFIDAVIT:

3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice, the Respondents No.1 to 3 filed the Reply-Affidavit dated 24.11.2011 of Director of Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh.

3(i). Reply-Affidavit stated that the Recruitment- Notice dated 06.08.2010 [Annexure P-7], was issued, advertising 06 posts of Punjabi Teachers. In Para 11(A) and 11(E) of the Reply-Affidavit, the Respondents have stated that out of 06 advertised posts, one post of Punjabi Teacher was reserved for the OBC category [in GSSS Majari] but the petitioner had not applied for reserved OBC post nor made the application as in Annexure P-10 was received by respondents.

REBUTTAL BY PETITIONER:

4. Petitioner filed a rejoinder to the reply of respondents No.1 to 3, stating that as per the OBC Certificate dated 21.08.2004 [at Page 86 of Paper-Book] the petitioner had a right for appointment against the OBC post.

5. Heard, Mr. Raman Jamalta, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sumit Sharma, Learned Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3 and Mr. Surender Sharma, Learned Counsel for respondent No.4 and have gone through the available material on record.

ANALYSIS:

6. Taking into account the entirety of the facts and circumstances and the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the claim of the petitioner against her non-selection as Punjabi Teacher against the reserved OBC post; and the selection/ appointment of the Respondent No.4 [Daljeet Singh] on 24.10.2010 [Annexure P-8] does not call for any interference, for the following reasons:

6(i). Perusal of the Recruitment Notice- Advertisement dated 06.08.2010 [Annexure P-7], reveals that six posts of Punjabi Teachers on period basis were to be filled up by Deputy Director of Elementary Education, Bilaspur. Recruitment Notice shows that out of total six posts, one post was meant for OBC category candidates. Further, the Recruitment Notice [Annexure P-7], indicates that eligible candidates were to submit applications on prescribed proforma as spelt out in the Advertisement-Recruitment Notice. Clause 17 of the Recruitment Notice expressly mandated that the candidates applying