Shubham Kumar And Another v. The State Of Haryana And Others

   


     
 

  







 

!



 #


  
 

  !"#"$%

% & ' % ()*+,

 % "  *+(+-*!

% .

(,

 '/ *+,

% 

 % *+,

0 % 

$
 

*+,

01!22
 

 &  ' 3

 

$



+

( 4


 2

)' /

certiorari 



(

3 5+

3 7+8$( "

!

(

, 


5!
8 %

"8    !

 

 2

(    2



($

 $

5!22
8 / ((  $' 

 5+

348

/ 

(



$ 



)  .

("*

!
$( +,



'033 ,

$ ,



*(' $     %

 59 "8    !22
  :       $ *  4  /

 

3/

 


' ":31;3* !


 $

 /



$ 

< ("'

  (/ 

*/(

5 ((  

 3 134*

$ , ("8+

 "

, /*

/



%

"8/ !22
* 

(

(

;=5+

48 < ("*

(

/



 > =11 31=1*

$ , ("*

''

,> = !/

* 

(  

  ;=  5+

 48  /  (( '




331= Lalit Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others 
= =  Jyoti Nagil vs. State of Haryana and others  '

< ("'

   '

?

) 

, /   / 

  

  $

/

((/



!
 '

  ?

)

, / 



%

"8 

,   +''

  "   

 @+13   Haryana Public Service Commission vs. Lalit Kumar / $

//   , .



,

3 2 

' *
:
44  Lalit Kumar vs. Nishant Kumar Yadav and another / (  "

*!


, A (# (

3 5+

3 7+8*/










1 @

(

 inter alia 



*

 /

 (" 

 $    %

 59 "8    

3  

, $ 

2, /

 "


0331=5+

318 Lalit Kumar vs.

State of Haryana and others*

,

( /

 

(0=B  

(04B*

$ , ("*

!



$

 CWP No.13215 2009 CGajraj Singh Vs. State of HaryanaD

$ 

'

 "/ (( ,

"

0!
( ((

*"

'

('(

 ,

$ +

("*=  

'$  '

(

' "*

((("', A

*
0=44  CJyoti Nagil Vs. State of Haryana and others,D



&" 0 '(/ ((/ ,

3;  @

(





  

 

415+

3;8*

 $(



"/

' $  ((' - $+

. !/

0!
(''

"$)'"

$ '

"

 ) $ 

$ ,

$

2

'

B

# 

*!

<  +

E'

5E(

 (8*$  +,   0 ;    =*   

($

   

* !

  , (E'

5E(

 (8*$  +, 0 1=*/

 - $.$  

( * 

4331*$(

!
*

$




 "*/





+ "3. The waiting list has been prepared in accordance with the reference from Chief Secretary to Govt. Haryana (Human Resource)II branch) vide memo NO.66/16/2021)3HR)II dated 07.06.2024." 4 +*



(04B

 < (  %

59 "8* "



, %

Gajraj Singh (supra) 

'  ((" (

$

"/

$ 



(

*



(

( (

"'  





 /

,   >'



A



!

 (

'


 

.

Gajraj Singh (supra)"('

@+03433*//   ,.

,

1332 * 

( /

 

( /







 ( (

, "  (( ", ' 7

# 

$(   $     (    

in extenso "   


  CWP No.15962 2020 ,Anshul Vs. State of Haryana and another-  =/



 




 

(

 '

0  (

 

$

@+011 1

@5
803111

!D( $




* //

  +* (

 

<

     

   , /    

   

415+

3;8

$  Gajraj Singh's case (supra) Anshul's case (supra)  @

( ($(

$

$ 

  "


01;11 CMohit Garg Vs. State of Haryana and others-*
04=3  ,Ram Karan and others Vs. State of Haryana and others-*
0== 3 ,Mukesh Vs. State of Haryana and others-*@+033; ,Jyoti Sharma Vs. State of Haryana and others- 
0313

 ,Shivam Rohilla Vs. State of Haryana and others- ! 



>

' ((

>'

/( (

("  

    

  

      

  "



/(

$

' $  $ 

*  ((/   "

$



$  

)' '

 < ("  @

(

0!


(

 $

       

    , /     

"  $ , 

!


,(

, 5E6  , .

8 +(( 

,

:



, 


7
  E6

+ *5

C + D8!



 568 + 

C/ '

( D 

 



  (

" !


, 7$ ,

,

,

$ !



$ 158 + 



-,

 



/ 

$( /(  (  * 


7
  E6

* / 

!
# 

$( 


 




014  CBalinder Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others'   4  /

 Anshul's case (supra) /   

      /

. (

( /

   '

 (

,



  

 /  , + ; A

*(

(

$

!D( $




'State of Jammu and Kashmir and others Vs. Sat Pal' 2013

(2) SCT 250/



  > , ( " +* , /

)  Anshul's case (supra)  Sat Pal's case (supra) /(  

(

+

("*

*/

6 A

 $( 

!D( $




 'Vallampati Sathish Babu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh' 2022 (13) SCC 193  ,



",(,



) $ (

6 (

2  (

"$ ,



("

'

 '

 

$

( :   



!D( $




"



,.

 


/( 

3 A

*CState of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Karunesh Kumar and others, 2022 SCC OnLine 1706* !D( $






$(

 ' ,   (

 $



 * " ( 

  $





"('



0!


 (

  

"'  mandamusA

!D( $




*/(  ' @(

 in Anshul's case (supra),

 



 ( < ( /,(, *$ 

*    ', (

 /

33 !

,'

(

(

 (

*



'

, "(

 3 +

("*

$

$





  /

 (

("  

     $    %

 59 "8     



 $( /  (( $$( ( ( */  "





+*

/

("  

  

*  / 

((   $

   

<

 A

*

("*

$

(( ( ( /  !22


$ %

59 "82 



/

"

*$  /* "/ )   3   $ *

 $' 

 5+

348 $  A

((*  '

"

( 



 

  



$ 2 

(



< $

'  (    

     

     



 (%

*Karunesh Kumar (supra)



/

 (

/( Vallampati Sathish Babu (supra)

      /  /

  "   $    

  (   



$

'

* ("



> (

* "  

 (

  

" ((  $

( +

$( "(

(

0!


 Karunesh Kumar (supra)  Vallampati Sathish Babu (supra)   3=

 

(",

,.

 


Gajraj Singh's case (supra),/

*$

)' '&  %%

((/'

/

 "3. Having heard the learned counsel, we are of the view that the aforesaid contention which has again been raised before us was rightly rejected by the learned Single Judge. It is well settled that once a post has not been consumed and a meritorious candidate in the merit list is available then the vacancy could be filled in by inviting next person in merit. The direction issued by the learned Single Judge are consistent with the principles of equality laid down in Articles and

(1) of the Constitution. The post of Lecturer in Hindi has to be offered to the most meritorious candidate who may be next in the merit after Vinod Kumar under the ex)serviceman category. Therefore, no exception is provided to interfere in the view taken by the learned Single Judge. The appeal is wholly without merit and does not warrant admission. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed."

+*

,  

(, */

 $



*

(("$

/(( ',

 /

$$



+"$ 

(

  ( (( 

( 



 

/ 

(

$ 

(  31 A

$( "(

(



Mohit Garg(supra), Ram Karan(supra), Mukesh Jyoti Sharma(supra) and Shivam Rohilla (supra) 



"(

(

 0!
  

  

    



 

*

/ )  



 "


3  2, /  ,

 ((/  + '("*  $'

(

3 5+

3 7+8

0

 5+

348



"*

 ("

/ 

(

A

*



4= 5+

3B38

(

  34

(      "*   $

   ((       ((  < (  



/  

,'

$ , / 



)



$ 

 $" 

'

 (

  

$

)'7

  70 

$

(  70