IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 24.02.2025 Dr. Vikas Chaudhary .... Petitioner Versus Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Sirsa and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Advocate, Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocate, Mr. Anshuman Sethi, Advocate, Mr. Paramdeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vineet Chaudhary, Advocate, for respondents no.1 to 3.

Mr. Harish Rathi, Sr. DAG, Haryana. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)

The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to convey final selection result for the post of Assistant Professor, Department of Law, in the respondent University in response to advertisement ET-1/2018, Annexure P-1, and offer appointment to the petitioner in case he is found eligible and suitable for the post.

2. As per brief facts, some law students of the University earlier approached this Court by filing CWP No. 18071 of 2015 titled Ankur Deswal and others v. Secretary to His Excellency Governor of Haryana and others, which was disposed of vide order dated 22.11.2017, with the following directions:

In view thereof, the present petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the University as well as the Director General Higher Education Government of Haryana, to initiate process to fill up the vacant permanent sanctioned posts in the Department of Laws of the University and complete the same as early as possible, preferably within a period of six months from today.

2.1. The University, accordingly, invited applications for various posts in the Department, including three posts of Assistant Professor (one each under General, Scheduled Castes and Physically Challenged categories). The petitioner applied for the General category post, and appeared in the written test under roll number 2056. As per report by the screening committee, appended to the petition as Annexure P-6, he secured 57.38 out of 80 marks, and appeared for the interview on 17.06.2018. The selection result, however, was not declared, and despite efforts the petitioner could not come to know about the outcome. He finally made a representation in that regard, dated 22.02.2019, Annexure P-11, and issued a legal notice also, dated 07.04.2019, Annexure P-14. It was replied to vide letter dated 13.06.2019, Annexure P-21, stating that, “the University has processed the selection process in a very fair and transparent manner. However, the University is under obligation to comply the direction of the superior and accordingly, the selection process has been stopped in compliance with the orders of the superior authorities and no monopolistic, hostile discrimination or arbitrary action is there”.

2.2. In these facts and circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the instant petition, wherein the University took the following stand as contained in para 2 of the written statement:

2. That as to how the impugned selection process, for the impugned advertised teaching posts of Assistant Professor in the Department of Law of the respondent No.1-University, has not yet even been completed and approved by the competent appointing authority, i.e., the Executive Council of the respondent No.1-University as aforesaid, is because the same stood stayed vide orders dated 20-6-2018 (Annexure R-1) of its Chancellor (cum-Governor of Haryana) issued on the false complaint dated 18-6-2018 (Annexure R-2) of the then Registrar of the respondent No.1-University, Dr. Aseem Miglani, sent by him to its Chancellor alleging as detailed therein that since, despite an alleged provision in this regard contained in Statute 24(3) of the University Act, he as its Registrar was not included by its Vice Chancellor in the constitution of the selection Committee which held the impugned selections on 17-6-2018 and therefore the said recommendations dated 17-6-2018 of the Selection Committee were in a way invalid as