The main legal point established in the judgment is that the result confidentially declared by the University before the cut off date and communicated to the Commission is valid, and the eligibility of educational qualification should be considered at the time of Screening or interview for future recruitments.

Kuldip Singh, J.

CM No. 924-LPA-2018

1. For the reasons mentioned in the application the same is allowed and delay in filing the appeal stands condoned.

Main case

2. By this common judgment, we shall dispose of LPA Nos.362, 405 to 409, 412 to 418, 421, 425, 427, 434 to 437, 439, 442, 443, 470, 517, 571, 572, 591, 613, 918 of 2018.

3. Haryana Staff Selection Commission has preferred these Intra Court Appeals against judgment dated 23.10.2017 passed by a Single Bench of this Court, in which, the following order was passed:-

12. Hence, in view of what has been stated hereinabove, as also as per the ratio of the Division Bench judgment in CWP no. 9533 of 2001, “Ankita Beniwal vs. Haryana Public Service Commission”, these petitions are allowed and the respondent Commission is directed to interview the petitioners if they otherwise come within the zone of selection as per the marks obtained by the last candidate, in each category in which the petitioners have applied, provided of course that the result in the case of each petitioner, in the examination concerned, was disclosed by the respondent University prior to the cut off date i.e. 12.10.2015 as per the corrigendum Annexure P-2.

4. The facts of the case are extracted from LPA No. 362 of 2018.

5. The controversy in the present case is very short. The Haryana Staff Selection Commission advertised posts for Post Graduate Teachers in different disciplines, including Mathematics and English. The last date for receipt of online applications form was 12.10.2015. Since B.Ed. result of the petitioners was not officially declared by Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak before the said cut off date, they applied to the University for conveying their result confidentially, which the University did and in this way, on the basis of the confidential result, the petitioners applied before the cut off date i.e. 12.10.2015. There is no dispute regarding the same. The result was declared on 5.11.2015 when the cut off date had already passed. This Court is informed that in the result, all the petitioners passed their examination, though there was little difference in marks between the marks conveyed through confidential result and the result officially declared. Screening test was done on 6.3.2016 and the interviews were held from 7.10.2016 to 10.10.2016. During screening, candidature of the petitioners was rejected on the ground that their result was not officially declared before the cut off date.

6. The question posed before the learned Single Bench as well as before this Bench is as to whether the result confidentially declared by the University is a validly declared result?

7. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents-writ petitioners, we are of the view that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order of the Single Bench. In this case, when the result was not declared before the cut off date, the present petitioners applied to the University for declaring their result confidentially which the University did. The result was conveyed to the Haryana Staff Selection Commission confidentially which made the petitioners eligible.

8. Plea of learned counsel for the appellant is that in the Calender of Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, for the year 2005, as per Clauses 29, 30 and 37, only the Registrar or Controller of Examination can publish the result. Since, the final result was not declared by the Registrar or the Controller of Examination, therefore, the result confidentially conveyed, is not a validly declared result.

9. We are of the view that the Haryana Staff Selection Commission has taken a hyper technical view of the matter. The University had the power to declare the result under its Calender. When the University had the power to declare final result, it has always got the power to declare the result of some of the students provisionally/confidentially in case of emergent situation, which they did. Power of the Registrar to declare the resu