Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, J.
Naresh Kumar and others - Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others - Respondents
CWP No. 5203 of 2012 (O & M)
Decided On : 28-02-2018
Incomplete Forms - Selection Process - Haryana Transport Department (Group C) Haryana Roadways Service Rules, 1995 - [A candidate must (a) be a citizen of India, (b) be of good moral character, (c) be of sound health, (d) not have more than one spouse living, (e) should have passed matric school examination with Hindi as language subject and should have a TRANSPORT VEHICLE DRIVING LICENSE. The candidate should have at least two years of experience of driving a transport vehicle including a passenger vehicle.]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenge the final list of 47 candidates chosen to be selected for the post of Driver at Sonepat Depot issued on 29.08.2011 under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India by way of a writ of certiorari. The same is in pursuance of the advertisement issued by the Transport Department in the year 2007 for the recruitment of 910 posts of Drivers on contract/daily wage basis. Resultantly, a writ of mandamus is also sought directing the official respondents to select and appoint the petitioners on the posts of Drivers at Sonepat Depot being more meritorious.
Finding of the Court:
The appointments of respondent nos. 27, 31, 33 and 53 are quashed as they were not appointed in terms of the advertisement and were not in consonance with the same and the eligibility qua three candidates was totally missing and respondent no. 53-Sanjay Kumar could not have been adjusted in the Sonepat selection as his name did not figure in the list of candidates in the notice dated 20.05.2011 and, thus, has been wrongly adjusted by the respondent-State to grant appointment. Qua other respondent nos. 14, 45 and 52 on account of FIR being lodged against them, State shall take necessary action for verifying the same as the licenses have been issued by other States and then proceed in accordance with law.
Issues: The issue was whether the appointments of the respondents were in accordance with the advertisement and the eligibility criteria.
Ratio Decidendi: The appointments of the respondents were not in accordance with the advertisement and the eligibility criteria, and therefore, were quashed by the court.
Final Decision: The appointments of respondent nos. 27, 31, 33 and 53 are quashed as they were not appointed in terms of the advertisement and were not in consonance with the same and the eligibility qua three candidates was totally missing and respondent no. 53-Sanjay Kumar could not have been adjusted in the Sonepat selection as his name did not figure in the list of candidates in the notice dated 20.05.2011 and, thus, has been wrongly adjusted by the respondent-State to grant appointment. Qua other respondent nos. 14, 45 and 52 on account of FIR being lodged against them, State shall take necessary action for verifying the same as the licenses have been issued by other States and then proceed in accordance with law.
G.S. Sandhawalia, J.
The present judgment shall dispose of 5 writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 5203, 14953 of 2012; 5725, 12748 of 2013 and 20334 of 2017, since common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. Facts are being taken from CWP No. 5203 of 2012, Naresh Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others.
2. The petitioners challenge the final list of 47 candidates chosen to be selected for the post of Driver at Sonepat Depot issued on 29.08.2011 (Annexure P-9) under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India by way of a writ of certiorari. The same is in pursuance of the advertisement issued by the Transport Department in the year 2007 for the recruitment of 910 posts of Drivers on contract/daily wage basis. Resultantly, a writ of mandamus is also sought directing the official respondents to select and appoint the petitioners on the posts of Drivers at Sonepat Depot being more meritorious.
3. The pleaded case of the petitioners is that vide the advertisement dated 22.07.2007, applications were made for filling up 910 posts of Drivers on contract/daily wages in the Transport Department (Annexure P-1). A candidate was required to submit only one application to the General Manager of any Haryana Roadways Depot in the State where he would like to appear for the tests. The list of 20 depots of Haryana Roadways was also given in the advertisement. The selection process comprised of DUG test, a road test followed by an interview test. In the advertisement also, prescribed educational qualifications for these posts was to be 10th class with Hindi from any recognized Board. The professional qualification prescribed was to have a valid driving license of a transport vehicle and the eligibility which is prescribed was that the candidate should have at least two years experience of driving a transport vehicle including the passenger vehicle. The clause reads thus:-
“A candidate must (a) be a citizen of India, (b) be of good moral character, (c) be of sound health, (d) not have more than one spouse living, (e) should have passed matric school examination with Hindi as language subject and should have a TRANSPORT VEHICLE DRIVING LICENSE. The candidate should have at least two years of experience of driving a transport vehicle including a passenger vehicle. Eligibility shall be determined with regard to the last date fixed for the receipt of the application form.”
4. It is the case of the petitioners that they being duly qualified had applied for the post within the prescribed period and their driving licenses are appended as Annexures alongwith their experience certificates. Since they belonged to Sonepat district, they submitted applications for the test in the said depot. The DUG test had been conducted on 12.11.2007 to 23.11.2007 and the petitioners had all duly qualified. Thereafter, zig zag test was held from 24.11.2007 to 28.11.2007 and the road test on 29.11.2007 and 30.11.2007. The petitioner having qualified these tests were accordingly called for interview which was held between 09.01.2008 to 11.01.2008. A final list of 48 candidates had been issued for the drivers of the Sonepat Depot on 20.06.2008 (Annexure P-4) and names of the petitioners found mention in the said list at Sr. Nos. 9, 46, 6, 11, 4, 35, 39, 28 and 45 respectively. The said petitioners had thereafter joined duties w.e.f. 24.06.2008 and allotted their numbers.
5. However, CWP Nos. 728 and 3772 of 2009 titled as Sanjay Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and Jitender Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana respectively came to be filed by the unselected candidates. The writ petition was allowed on 11.03.2011 (Annexure P-5) and directions were issued to hold selection afresh for the Sonepat Depot by considering all 100 candidates who had passed the three tests afresh.
6. Resultantly, appointments given to the petitioners and other selected candidates had been ordered to be withdrawn vide order dated 31.03.2011 (Annexure P-6). Resu
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
