High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/10658/2021disposed of

Simran Kaur Kakkar v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission And Another

2021-06-28Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: - 28.06.2021 Simran Kaur Kakkar ....Petitioner

Versus

Haryana Staff Selection Commission and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. D.S. Matya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, AAG, Haryana.

(keeping in view the advance copy given).

( Through Video Conferencing ) *** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has secured 64 marks while competing for the post of Lower Division Clerk, which was advertised by advertisement No.11/2019. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that two posts of Lower Division Clerk were reserved for the ESP General Category, the category under which the petitioner had applied and as per the criteria, a candidate was required to be given five additional marks under the Socio-Economic Criteria, which was to be added to the score which a candidate scores in the written examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits

-2that petitioner had secured 59 marks in the written examination and was also entitled for five marks under Socio-Economic Criteria, making it to 64 marks. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the final result declared, only one candidate has been selected in the category under which the petitioner had applied, whose final marks are 59 i.e. less than the petitioner, hence, the respondents wrongly ignored the claim of the petitioner for appointment as Lower Division Clerk against two posts advertized.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that for the relief, which is being claimed in the present writ petition, petitioner has submitted representations dated 19.05.2021 (Annexure P-5), which are still pending consideration with the respondents and the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a time bound direction is issued to respondent No.1 to decide the said representations. Notice of motion.

Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the service of advance copy of petition, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and raises no objection with regard to prayer of the petitioner for deciding the representations dated 19.05.2021 (Annexure P-5) by respondent No.1 in a time bound manner by passing an appropriate speaking order.

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioner, respondent No.1 is directed to decide the representations dated 19.05.2021

-3- (Annexure P-5) by passing a speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Present writ petition stands disposed of.

( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) June 28, 2021 JUDGE naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?