IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

254 (9 cases) CWP-13867-2017 Date of Decision: 12.02.2026 Balram …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents With Sr. Case No. Petitioner(s) Respondents No.

2. CWP-12736-2017 Virpal Dalal and State of Haryana and (O&M) others others

3. CWP-13552-2017 Pardeep Kumar State of Haryana and (O&M) another

4. CWP-13658-2017 Rohit State of Haryana and others

5. CWP-13728-2017 Satish State of Haryana and others

6. CWP-13766-2017 Jagbir Singh and State of Haryana and another another

7. CWP-13770-2017 Rajat Kumar State of Haryana and another

8. CWP-13844-2017 Pardeep State of Haryana and others

9. CWP-13892-2017 Mahipal and others State of Haryana and (O&M) others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. Gaurav Tyagi, Advocate for Mr. S.S. Kharb, Advocate the petitioners (in CWP No.12736 of 2017, CWP No.13552 of 2017 &

CWP No.13766 of 2017)

Mr. Vikas Malik, Advocate for Mr. Balbir Kumar Saini, Advocate for petitioner (in CWP No.13867 of 2017)

Mr. Harinder Malik, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP No.13728 of 2017) Mr. Ashok Kumar Khubbar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana ***

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order.

CWP-13867-2017

2. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of result dated 22.05.2017 declared for calling the candidates for Interview-cum-Personality Test. He is further seeking direction to respondents to conduct his interview.

3. The petitioner, pursuant to Advertisement No.8/2015 dated 19.07.2015, applied for the post of Constable under BC-B Category. As per advertisement, the selection process comprised four stages i.e. Physical Screening Test (‘PST’), Knowledge Test (‘KT’), Physical Measurement Test (‘PMT’) and Interview-cum-Personality Test. PST carried 15 marks, KT 60 marks and PMT 15 marks. There were total 5,000 posts which were divided into different categories. 1650 seats were earmarked for General Category, 1000 for SC Category, 800 for BC-A, 550 for BC-B, 500 for SBC and 500 for EBPGC. All the candidates were supposed to participate in PST Screening Test which was to be followed by Knowledge Test. The candidates were supposed to qualify standards prescribed under Rule 12.15(2) read with 12.16(9)(C) of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to State of Haryana) (for short ‘PPR’). On the basis of combined score of PST+KT+PMT, the candidates had to be invited for Interview-cum- Personality Test. Three times of number of vacancies in each category had to be invited for Interview-cum-Personality Test. The respondent conducted PST of 5,05,566 candidates. 1,25,677 candidates qualified in the PST. In the Knowledge Test, 19,174 candidates qualified. 13,179 candidates qualified for PMT. Three times of vacancies in each category were selected for interview. Cut-off of last candidate called for Interview-cum-Personality Test in each category was as below:

4. The respondent called candidates for interview as detailed below:

5. It is apt to mention here that no reservation was finally granted to SBC Category candidates. They filed CWP No.21480 of 2016 before this Court. As per orders of this Court, candidates of SBC Category were considered under General Category. The petitioner participated upto the stage of PMT, however, was not called for interview. In the writ petition, he claimed that last candidate in BC-B Category has scored 54.95 marks while he has obtained more marks. He has qualified PMT. He was not aware of marks secured by him in all the three stages.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of hearing, pleaded that respondent did not invite candidates three times of