Jaspreet Kaur v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CWP-19288-2016 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19288-2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.09.2024 Jaspreet Kaur ......Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:

Mr. Shiv Charan Bhola, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Swapan Shorey, DAG, Punjab .

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) 1.

In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner competed for appointment to the post of Social Studies Teacher but the petitioner though was selected but was not allowed to join and therefore, the respondents are liable to be directed to allow the petitioner to join the post in question.

2.

Upon notice of motion, the respondents have filed reply, wherein, it has been mentioned that a select list of the candidates selected was uploaded on 15.10.2014 on the official website and the candidates were required to submit their acceptance of the appointment within a period of 15 days and rule was that the candidate who does not submit the said acceptance letter, his/her candidature was to be cancelled. The last date for sending the said acceptance letter was 07.11.2014, upto which date the petitioner never accepted the appointment order. 3.

As per the respondents, thereafter another opportunity was given to the selected candidates to submit their acceptance so that the stations could be SATYAWAN 2024.09.09 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-19288-2016 (O&M) allotted to them, however, the petitioner did not avail even the benefit of the notice dated 20.11.2014 and did not appear for the counselling which was held from 02.12.2014 to 05.12.2014 and thereafter, once again, another opportunity was given vide notice dated 15.01.2015, which opportunity was also not availed by the petitioner to give her acceptance qua her selection to the post in question and therefore, the claim of the petitioner was treated as abandoned. 4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available with their able assistance. 5.

The only issue which has been raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner has not been given appointment after being selected for the post in question. Keeping in view the reply given by the respondents, it is the petitioner who failed to give the acceptance qua the selection though more than three opportunities were granted to her. Once, the petitioner did not accept the offer of appointment, it cannot be said that the the respondents are under obligation to wait for the petitioner till eternity.

6.

There is no replication to the averments made in paragraphs 3 & 4 of the reply to the preliminary submissions made in the written statement at the hands of the petitioner to deny the said fact. 7.

Keeping in view the above, as the petitioner failed to act upon her selection process and never gave the acceptance letter to the department to accept the appointment, despite more than one opportunity given, no ground is made out for grant of any benefit to the petitioner as claimed in the present writ petition. 8.

Dismissed.

04.09.2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SATYAWAN 2024.09.09 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document