IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

213 Date of decision: 20.02.2025 Amit Kumar ...Petitioner VERSUS Haryana Staff Selection Commission and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Kuldeep Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Tapan Kumar, DAG Haryana.

Mr. Brijender Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.2.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. Challenge in the present petition is to the result dated 19.03.2021 to the extent the petitioner had been not selected for the post of Pharmacist advertised vide Advt. No.15/2019 dated 07.09.2019 despite the petitioner having secured more marks.

2. The grievance espoused by the petitioner is that the respondent- authorities have not given him the benefit of the marks for experience despite the requisite documents having been uploaded by him in support of his claim and resultantly, the person lower in merit has been given appointment while the claim of the petitioner has been ignored.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the respondent-Commission had issued an Advt. No.15/2019 dated 07.09.2019 advertising 4322 posts of various Departments/Corporations/

Boards including 42 posts of General Category Pharmacist. Being duly eligible, the petitioner submitted an application for consideration against the said post. The copy of the application form as uploaded by the petitioner is attached as Annexure P-2. In the column of experience, the details required to be furnished by an applicant, the petitioner had specifically mentioned that he has 05 years 10 months and 11 days experience with National Health Mission, Panipat which is a Government Scheme/Project. The relevant part thereof is extracted as under:-

“xxxxx Experience Details Organisation Deptt./Corp./ From To Experience PSU/Others Date (In Months)

(dd/mm/yyyy) (dd/mm/yyyy)

NHM Panipat Govt. 21/11/2013 02/10/2019 5 years, 10 months, 11 Days xxxx Scanned copy of all documents showing Click here to view document Essential/Higher qualification, experience etc.

on which basis candidate claim marks.

xxxxxx”

4. He draws the attention of this Court towards the experience certificate dated 24.06.2019 issued by the Dy. Civil Surgeon, Panipat, which is extracted as under:-

“Experience Certificate

1. This is to certify that Shri/Smt./Ms/Kumari Amit Kumar Son/daughter/wife of Shri Sukhvir Singh resident of H.No. 742 village/town Mandi Tehsil Israna District Panipat of Haryana State/Union Territory has been serving as Pharmacist (RBSK) (Complete nomenclature of the post in the office of NHM, Panipat (HARYANA) (Department/Board/Corporation/Company/Statutory Body/ Commission / Authority of Government of Haryana or any State Government or Government of India.)

2. The period of engagement was from 21.11.2013 to

24.06.2019 and the completed years and months are 5 years, 7 months (years & months)

3. The EPF account no. (if any) is / was 101011386481 Place: Panipat sd/-

Date: 24.06.2019”

5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the terms and conditions of the advertisement, 0.5 marks were to be awarded for experience of one year or part thereof exceeding six months.

The criteria prescribing marks for the experience is extracted as under:-

“d. Experience One-half (=0.5) mark for each year or part thereof exceeding six month of experience, out of a maximum of sixteen years, on the same or a higher post in any Department/Board/Corporation/Company/Statutory Body/ Commission/ Authority of Government of Haryana. No marks shall be awarded for any period less than six months.

(A maximum of 8 marks)

Note:- No applicant shall be given more than 10 marks for socio economic criteria and experience under any circumstances.”

6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner appeared in the written examination conducted by the respondents on 31.01.2021 against Roll No.31008014. Carbon copy of OMR answer sheet was made available to the candid