High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/8387/2016dismissed

Ved Parkash v. Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra & ANR

2018-07-17Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

CWP No. 8387 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 8387 of 2016 Date of decision : 17.07.2018 Ved Prakash

...Petitioner

versus Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra and anr.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Ms. Kiranjeet Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Ravinder Malik (Ravi), Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate for respondent No. 1 **** RITU BAHRI , J.

Petitioner pursuant to the advertisement bearing No. 2/2013 applied for the post of Technical Assistant (Computer). He was called for interview, which was held on 20.07.2014 and was shortlisted under S.C. Category along with respondent No. 2. The petitioner was then called for interview vide letter dated 30.07.2014. On 08.01.2016, the result was declared and respondent No. 2 was selected on the post of respondent No. 2, which is under challenge before this Court on the short ground that as per R.T.I information received by the petitioner, respondent No. 2 never applied under the S.C category and thus, petitioner should be given appointment letter.

On notice, a written statement has been filed by respondent No. 1 stating there in that respondent No. 2 was selected on the basis of merit Gaurav Arora 2018.07.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 8387 of 2016 and as per selection criteria adopted for the post of Technical Assistant (Computer) under Self Financial Scheme. It has been stated in the written statement that Rajesh Kumar-respondent No. 2 earlier applied vide Advertisement No. 5/2011 and with his application, he enclosed the S.C certificate issued by Sub Divisional Officer, Pehowa dated 20.07.2000 (Annexure R-1/A) but he submitted fresh application, pursuant to the advertisement dated 2/2013 wherein he had clearly mentioned his category as SC and also submitted a copy of SC category.. It is not in dispute that respondent No. 2 was meritorious than the petitioner and notice in the present case was issued only on the point that whether respondent No. 2 filled his form under SC category, which as per written statement filed by respondent No. 1, respondent No. 2 applied under S.C category.

No merits.

Dismissed.

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE 17.07.2018 G Arora Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Gaurav Arora 2018.07.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh