IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 19.11.2025 Pronounced on: 02.12.2025 Uploaded on: 02.12.2025 Adarsh Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Bhiwani ….Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Dr. Surya Parkash, Advocate (through video conferencing), for the petitioner.

Mr. Aakash Singla, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

Mr. Jitesh Malik, Advocate, for respondent no.3.

Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Anshul Labana, Advocate, for respondent no.4.

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.

The petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the judgment dated 20.01.2020, Annexure P-14, passed by the fifth respondent/Educational Tribunal, Bhiwani, in Civil Appeal bearing CNR No.HRBH010076932015, instituted on 05.11.2015.

2. Facts of the case in brief are, the petitioner College advertised certain posts of Lecturers, including one post of Lecturer in Sanskrit

2025.12.02 10:33 (General), vide advertisement dated 07.09.2008, Annexure P-3. The fourth respondent also applied for the post, and was selected in the interview held on 22.10.2008; she joined as such on 19.11.2008. Her selection and appointment was challenged by another candidate, Suman, by filing CWP No.4150 of 2009. The petition was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 28.03.2011, holding as under:

The writ petition, therefore, is allowed. Direction is hereby issued to the respondents to carry out the fresh assessment of the petitioner and respondent no.4 on the basis of criteria laid down and redo the entire exercise by re-assessing the merit strictly in terms of the criteria as formulated.

Pursuant to re-assessment of merit in terms of the directions issued by this Court, Suman was placed at number one in the order of merit, and the fourth respondent at number two. Accordingly, Suman was given appointment against the advertised post of Lecturer in Sanskrit, and she joined service on

17.12.2012.

2.1. The fourth respondent, thereafter, approached this Court by filing CWP No.8998 of 2012 against withdrawal of approval for her selection. This Court was pleased to grant interim stay against her removal vide order dated 15.05.2012 and accordingly, both, Suman and the fourth respondent, continued working in the College. The averments in the said petition regarding availability of sanctioned posts of Lecturer in Sanskrit read as under:

CWP No.8998 of 2012:

Para No.7 of the petition: That it is necessary to mention here that there are three sanctioned posts of Lecturers in Sanskrit/Assistant Professors in the Adarsh Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Bhiwani. The copy of the detail of sanctioned

2025.12.02 10:33 posts to this effect is attached as Annexure P-7. So this clearly demonstrate that there are two vacant posts of Sanskrit teachers already lying vacant and these posts fall vacant after retirement of Dr. Saroj Sethi, Assistant Professor, Sanskrit on 31.10.2007 and one Vijay Sharma, Assistant Professor, Sanskrit sought voluntary retirement on 21.10.2010.

The petitioner College (respondent therein) filed reply to the petition through the College Principal, Dr. Alka Sharma, responding to these averments in the following manner:

That the contents of Para No.7 of the writ petition are admitted being a matter of record, hence need no reply.

The petition was finally allowed vide order dated 18.02.2014 and, in terms of the directions issued therein the petitioner College permitted the fourth respondent to work against the said vacant post of Lecturer in Sanskrit; the directions read as under:

By applying the ration of above noted decisions as well as the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, it is in the interest of justice to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to work against the post of Lecturer in Sanskrit which is lying vacant after the filing of this petition.

However, it is made clear that the petitioner would not be entitled to claim seniority against the post she is continuing b