IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

239+240 CWP-9390-2022 (O & M)

Date of Decision: 03.03.2025 Rubal Chaudhary ......Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondent(s)

Sr. Case No. Parties Name No.

2. CWP-2367-2022 Narender Kumar vs. State of Haryana and another

3. CWP-11657-2022 Jagvinder Singh and another vs. State of Haryana and others

4. CWP-22670-2021 Narender Kumar vs. Haryana Staff Selection Commission

5. CWP-3371-2022 Amit Singh vs. State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: Mr. Deepak Sonak, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-9390-2022.

Mr. Gopal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-2367-2022 &

CWP-22670-2021.

Mr. P.S. Chauhan, Advocate and Mr. Aman Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-11657-2022.

Mr. Ajit Sihag, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-3371-2022.

Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Nikita Goel, Advocate, Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate and Mr. Shivam Malik, Advocate for the respondent-HSIIDC.

Mr. Rahul Jaswal, Advocate for respondent No.3 in CWP-2367-2022 for respondent No.4 in CWP-9390-2022.

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. By this common order, above noted writ petitions are hereby adjudicated as issues involved and prayer sought in all the petitions are common. For the sake of convenience and with the consent of parties, the facts are borrowed from CWP-9390-2022.

2. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent No.3-Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC) to include his name in the final selection list for the post of Legal Assistant with respondent No.2-Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (HSIIDC).

3. HSSC on the requisition of HSIIDC issued advertisement No.14/2019 dated 26.08.2019 for 11 posts of Legal Assistant. The aforesaid posts included 6 for general category and others for reserved category. In the advertisement, essential qualification was prescribed which reads as under:-

“Essential Qualifications:-

1. Graduate (2^nd Division), LL.B Professional (2^nd Division) and having at least 2 yrs. experience in Govt./ Commerical organizations/Financial Institution/ Banks in drafting of deeds/agreements/terms/conditions/examinations of legal documents and pursuing of legal cases.

2. Hindi/Sanskrit as one of the subject in Matriculation or Higher.”

4. The petitioner pursuant to aforesaid advertisement applied for the post of Legal Assistant. He alongwith application form uploaded his experience certificate. He cleared written test and was called for scrutiny of documents. At the time of scrutiny of documents, he submitted another experience certificate besides certificate uploaded alongwith application form. The respondent rejected his candidature on the ground that he does not possess requisite experience which is part of essential qualification.

5. Mr. Deepak Sonak, Advocate submits that the petitioner (in CWP- 9390-2022) is having 9 years' experience. He alongwith application form uploaded experience certificate of Bar though he was having experience of working with a commercial organization. He had worked for one commercial organization for more than 2 years and during the said period was getting Rs.30,000/- per month. He was supposed to draft contracts, agreements, deeds and other legal documents. He was pursuing matters of said organization in the Courts, thus, he was having requisite experience. He, as per his understanding, uploaded experience certificate of Bar, however, produced requisite certificate at the time of documents verification. His candidature has been wrongly rejected. The HSSC was also doubtful about the experience certificate of Bar which compelled it to seek clarification from HSIIDC. In the clarification of HSIIDC, it has been mentioned that experience with Bar would not be considered, however, experience with any commercial organization is valid.

6. Mr. Gopal Sharma submi