Manoj Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14826-2025 Date of Decision :21.08.2025 Manoj Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present:

Mr. Sahil Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue appointment/joining letter to the petitioner for the post of Assistant Professor (Economics)-UR (Ex-serviceman/ESM) pursuant to advertisement 25/2024, and also for issuance of directions to decide the legal notice dated 19.04.2025, Annexure P-15, served on behalf of the petitioner.

2.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of the petition the legal notice dated 19.04.2025, has been replied to by the University vide letter dated 27.06.2025. The petitioner has been informed 'that no appointment letter was issued to the applicants as none of the aspirants was found eligible as per the recommendations of the Selection Committee'. But the reasons of ineligibility have not been disclosed. Reliance has been placed upon notification dated 01.10.1981, Annexure P-13, to contend that the University was required to give reasons for the petitioner's non-selection in terms thereof as he belonged to a reserved category-General ESM. PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.08.26 10:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-14826-2025 -23.

It is undisputed that the petitioner was found provisionally eligible for the post in question, and his candidature was also considered. However, the reason for not offering appointment is that none of the aspirants was found eligible by the selection committee. The basis of the petitioner's ineligibility has, however, not been disclosed which is necessary, all the more because he has been considered provisionally eligible by the University. The nondisclosure has prejudiced his rights. 4.

In view thereof, the petition is disposed of by directing Registrar of the third respondent/University to convey the petitioner reasons for his ineligibility for the post in question, within a period of six weeks of receiving a certified copy of this order.

(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) August 21, 2025 JUDGE ps Whether speaking/ reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.08.26 10:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document