LPA-47-2021

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

LPA-47-2021 (O&M) IN

CWP-6620-2016

Date of decision : 18.01.2021

Kamaldeep Kaur

...Appellant(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI

Present:

Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate,

for the appellant.

Mr. Pradeep Bajwa, Addl.A.G., Punjab.

JITENDRA CHAUHAN J. (ORAL)

The matter has been taken up through video-conferencing in the

light of the pandemic COVID-19 situation and as per instructions.

CM-130-LPA-2021

Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions.

CM-131-LPA-2021

Allowed as prayed for and the documents, Annexures A-1 to A-

4, are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

Main appeal

This intra-Court appeal under clause X of the Letters Patent is

directed against judgment dated 21.10.2020 passed by the learned single

ATUL SETHI

2021.01.22 12:22

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

LPA-47-2021

-2-

Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant seeking

appointment to the post of Teaching Fellow against the vacant post reserved

for the category of 'Dependents of Freedom Fighters' in District SBS Nagar.

Heard.

Learned Single Judge, while dismissing the writ petition of the

petitioner-appellant has observed as under:-

“Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the State

Government took a conscious decision and issued a

public notice (Annexure P-7) on 29.07.2013 canceling

the counseling held on 13.12.2011 and 20.12.2011.

The writ petitioner filed the present writ petition in

April, 2016 claiming that she has a right to be appointed

under Dependent of Freedom Fighter Category as she

was the only candidate who had appeared for counseling

on 13.12.2011. Pursuant to notice of writ petition,

respondent has filed a detailed reply contesting the

petition on the ground that it suffers from unexplained

delay and laches. It has further been brought to the

notice of this Court that the Government decided not to

fill up 1133 posts and issued a fresh recruitment notice

inviting applications for 4500 vacant posts of ETT on

09.11.2015. The Department further advertised 2005

posts of ETT vide Recruitment Notice dated 04.08.2016.

Keeping in view the aforesaid stand, the question

as posed in the initial part arises for consideration. It

must be noticed that it is not the case of the petitioner

that anyone who has secured marks lesser than her, has

been appointed in the category of Dependent of Freedom

Fighter. The respondents have taken a stand that

Poonam Sharma who had got 62.376 marks has been

ATUL SETHI

2021.01.22 12:22

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

LPA-47-2021

-3-

appointed. Thus, it is safe to conclude that no candidate

has been appointed from the category of the petitioner

with lesser marks than the petitioner. In the present case,

the Government took a conscious decision way back on

29.07.2013 abandoning to make the appointments

pursuant to the recruitment notice issued in the year

2007. The writ petition was filed in April, 2016

particularly when a fresh recruitment notice has already

been issued on 09.11.2015.”

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that despite the

decision taken by the government on 29.07.2013, not to fill up 1133 posts,

the recruitment has been made against this very post and out of these

appointments have been given even in the year 2020. However, the

argument is not tenable. The appellant has failed to show that Annexure A-1

is relatable to the appointment to the post of Teaching Fellor, pursuant to

recruitment dated 05.09.2007 (Annexure P-1). The petitioner cannot derive

any benefit from the information dated 12.01.2015 under the RTI Act, 2005

(Annexure A-1), whereby, appointment was given to one Smt. Rajni on

01.12.2013.

Learned counsel for the appellant furthe