High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/2237/2017dismissed

Ritin Sharma v. State Of Punjab Etc

2017-02-07Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 2237 of 2017 Date of decision: 07.02.2017 Ritin Sharma

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. S.S. Salar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) The instant writ petition has been filed for setting aside the notice/ corrigendum dated 08.12.2016 (Annexure P-3) which stipulates that Diploma is an essential qualification for recruitment to the post of Junior Engineer; with a further direction for the respondents to consider the petitioner as eligible and to be allowed to take the examination. The petitioner herein is a B.Tech in Mechanical Engineering with a good academic record and applied for the post of Junior Engineer pursuant to an advertisement issued on 24.11.2016. A corrigendum was issued on 08.12.2016 (Annexure P-3) to the said advertisement regarding essential qualification in which it was specified that all interested applicants should have Diploma in respective discipline.

It is contended that having a higher qualification should not be a bar to participate in the selection process/examination. It is further contended that certain persons have been allowed to take the examination. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and find that no ground is made out to entertain the writ petition. Admittedly, the Satyawan 2017.02.

CWP No. 2237 of 2017 -2recruitment process was initiated and the last date of submission of the application form was 18.12.2016. As per the schedule, the date of exam was 28.12.2016 and the result was to be declared on 04.01.2017. Since the examination has already been held, no ground is made out to direct the respondents to held the test of the petitioner. The argument raised that similar persons have been allowed to take examination is untenable as those persons approached the Court in time. If the petitioner had a grievance, he had to approach this Court before the examination was held and not after this delay of almost six weeks.

No ground is made out to interfere in the instant writ petition. Dismissed.

07.02.2017 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.

Whether reportable No.

Satyawan 2017.02.09 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh