IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on : 18.11.2025 Pronounced on : 27.11.2025 Uploaded on : 28.11.2025 Rekha Rani ........Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Mohit Garg, Advocate for Mr. Digvijay Nagpal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Swapan Shorey, D.A.G., Punjab *****

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing the instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the final merit list (Annexure P-2) for the post of Multipurpose Health Worker and a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for selection for the abovesaid post on the basis of merit and eligibility. Further directions have been sought for directing respondent No.4-Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct the investigation of the recruitment process of the abovesaid post in a fair and impartial manner. 2. The brief facts, as have been pleaded in the petition, are that vide Advertisement No.BFU-23/17, 985 posts of Multipurpose Health Workers were advertised and the petitioner being fully eligible applied for the said post under Sports SC (M&B) category and respondent No.2 issued Registration No.386576 and also Roll No.434370 to the petitioner. The written examination for the said post was held on 07.01.2024 in which the petitioner duly appeared and qualified the same by getting 52.75 marks and thereafter, she was called for counselling and for the verification of documents on 26.06.2024 and the petitioner duly appeared for verification of documents and at that point of time, she came to know about the mistake committed by the Computer Operator, who had filled her application form, that her application had been erroneously submitted under Sports SC (M&B) category instead of SC (M&B) category. She discussed about the said mistake with respondent No.2, who gave assurance to her that the mistake shall be rectified and qua that he even took an affidavit from the petitioner. However, respondent No.2 disqualified the petitioner, despite the fact that she secured 52.75 marks in the written examination and being fully eligible for appointment as Multipurpose Health Worker in SC (M&B) category, whereas the persons who had secured only 47 marks in written examination were selected for the abovesaid post.

Hence, the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of filling the form of the petitioner for the post of Multipurpose Health Worker, the Computer Operator inadvertently selected Sports SC (M&B) category instead of SC (M&B) category and the said fact came to the notice of the petitioner at the time of verification of documents and she immediately discussed about the said mistake with respondent No.2 who gave assurance to the petitioner that they will correct the said mistake and qua that even took an affidavit in support from the petitioner, however, respondent No.2 had disqualified the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner had secured 52.75 marks and is eligible to be appointed as Multipurpose Health Worker in SC (M&B) category as the persons who had secured only 47 marks in written examination were selected for the abovesaid post. He further contends that for redressal of her grievance, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 05.07.2025, bringing to the notice of the respondents the typographical mistake in the selection of her category, which had been committed by the Computer Operator and requested for reconsideration of her candidature under the correct category i.e. SC (M&B), however, no action has been taken by the respondents on the said representation. He further submits that a fraud had been perpetrated by respondents No.2 & 3, as 01 mark was awarded for one year experience, and several candidates had submitted forged experience certificates in support of t