JUDGMENT

Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J.

After having heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and on perusal of the various paper books, this court is of the considered opinion that the following question arises for adjudication:-

"Once it is established that the Departmental Selection Committee failed to follow the procedure laid down in the applicable rules and instructions for selecting the candidates claiming reservation under the category of Sports persons then whether the selection and consequential appointment of candidates is sustainable?"

2. In order to comprehend the controversy involved, it is imperative to acknowledge the fundamental facts involved.

3. The Department of Jails (Prison), Punjab, issued recruitment notice No.2 of 2011 on 12.10.2011 inviting applications for recruiting 527 Warders, Mat terns and Car/Jeep drivers. This batch of writ petitions pertain to selection of sports persons against the posts of Warders. As per the recruitment notice, the selection was based upon the written test, higher qualification etc. However, a decision was taken by the concerned department against holding the written test.

4. As per the facts noticed in the judgment dated 17.12.2016, the selection process was completed. However, on receipt of complaints of irregularity in the selection process, a public notice was issued on 05.06.2014 to cancel the selection made for the post of Warders. This public notice was based on the minutes of the meeting dated 23.12.2013 by which a decision was taken to scrap the recruitment process.

5. In the first round, 41 writ petitions including CWP 15409 of 2014 (Laxman Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others) and other connected cases challenging the correctness of the decision to scrap the selection was challenged. Vide judgment dated 17.12.2016, the writ petitions were allowed and the public notice dated 05.06.2014 was quashed while directing the respondents to complete the process of selection from the petitioners who full fill the requirement of a physical test by adopting the criteria as per the advertisement. The last paragraph of the said order reads as under:-

"However, the respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioners and fulfil the requirement of physical test by adopting the criteria as per advertisement and prepare a fresh merit list. In case, they are found to be eligible by considering the criteria as mentioned in the advertisement and corrigendum, they be considered for appointment against the vacancies which are lying vacant. The necessary exercise be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order."

6. After the aforesaid decision, a public notice and the provisional merit list without considering the candidature of some candidates was issued which was put to challenge in a fresh round of litigation. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 10.08.2017 with the following directions:-

"In the present case, the whole of the selection process has been cancelled and the direction has been issued to prepare fresh merit list as per terms and conditions of the advertisement and corrigendum. In case the petitioners are found to be entitled as per criteria, they be considered. It is also clarified that in case, the petitioners are in zone of consideration by considering their respective educational qualifications and physical test, they have a right to be considered but in case, they do not reach to the