IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 13.10.2025 Vinod Kumar and others ….Petitioners Versus Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh and others ….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Bhupinder Malik, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for respondent No.1 ****

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioners, who were amongst the unsuccessful candidates in the recruitment process initiated by respondent No.1, have approached this Court by way of instant writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the condition of ‘securing 35% marks in each paper/subject and 40% in aggregate to qualify for the next step of examination/appointment’ as specified in the recruitment notice dated 04.12.2024 (Annexure P-2), and also the final result dated 01.09.2025 (Annexure P-7). Further, a writ of Mandamus is also sought for, commanding respondent No.1, to constitute a new Selection Committee to conduct the interviews under videography, and maintain proper record of questions asked in the interview.

2. The dominant ground raised in the present petition is that, no condition of prescribi