Madhu Kumar v. State Of Haryana Etc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 17910 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.02.2025 Madhu Kumar ....Petitioner vs.
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:
Mr.D.S.Patwalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Armaan Dahiya, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. A.G., Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to consider him for the advertised post.
2.
The respondent vide order dated 29.07.2008 rejected claim of the petitioner for the post of Sub Inspector under Sports quota. From the perusal of reply, it is evident that there were two conditions for the advertised post i.e. Graduation and certificates of participation & outstanding sports achievements. The petitioner did not disclose certificates alongwith the application form.
3.
The claim of petitioner was rejected in 2008. A period of 17 years from the date of rejection of claim has already passed away. He was PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2025.02.05 02:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP No. 17910 of 2008 (O&M) -2claiming post of Sub Inspector which requires physical and mental fitness. The respondent might have selected other candidates pursuant to the advertisement in question. The respondent No. 5 joined service and, at this belated stage, her service cannot be disturbed keeping in mind a five Judge bench judgment of Supreme Court in Sivanandan C.T. and others vs. High Court of Kerala and others, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 994. 4.
In view of the above, this Court does not find it appropriate to interfere, at this belated stage.
5.
Dismissed.
6.
Pending Misc. application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 05.02.2025 paramjit Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:
No PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2025.02.05 02:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document