This court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of petitioners' promotion to Lecturer due to scores below 50% in M.A. The court held that rounding-off is impermissible absent explicit rules, relying on precedent.
The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to cost.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
CWP No.2506 of 1994
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.2506 of 1994 Date of decision:09.05.2012
Rakesh Kumar & others
.....Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana & another
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA
Present: Mr.Vishal Garg, Advocate, for
Mr.Ajay Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioners,
Ms.Aakanksha Sawhney, DAG, Haryana, for the respondents.
G .S.Sandhawalia J. (Oral)
the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari/mandamus challenging the action of the respondents in not promoting the petitioners as Lecturer and for quashing the order, Annexure P-6 dated 25.07.1993 passed by the Director of Secondary Education, Haryana, Chandigarh, respondent No.2.
Petitioner No.1 49.9% Petitioner No.2 49.8% Petitioner No.3 49.6%
2
CWP No.2506 of 1994
3
CWP No.2506 of 1994
fault, action had also been taken. Regarding promotion of Ramesh Chand, it has been mentioned that he was wrongly promoted as Lecturer in English since he was a Science Master and he had also been issued show cause notice as to why he should not be reverted back to the post of Science Master. Ramesh Chand had filed a writ petition before this Court wherein direction had been issued to the respondents that he shall be granted two chances to improve his qualifications and should be continued in service till then.
“11. I am not convinced with the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent should have given one per cent grace marks to the petitioner and relaxation should have been made. Concession cannot be claimed as a matter of right. It is the prerogative of the department to grant or not. A candidate who has secured 50 per cent marks in M.A. is only eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of lecturer. In the case in hand the petitioner is not fulfilling the requisite qualifications. He is, therefore, not entitled to any relief. In order to get mandamus a person must show that he has a legal right in law and the corresponding duty on the State, which the petitioner has miserably failed to prove.”
Reliance has also been placed upon a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kuldeep Singh, Legal Assistant, Punjab Financial Corporation Vs. State
of Punjab 1997 (3) PLR 1 to contend that rounding-off cannot be permitted in a written examination for bringing a candidate into the field of choice for selection unless the rule provides for the same. Reliance has also been placed upon Orissa Public Service Commission & another Vs. Rupashree Chowdhary & another AIR 2011 (SC) 3276 wherein the Hon'ble Apex
4
CWP No.2506 of 1994
Court held that no rounding-off of the aggregate marks shall be permitted which is in violation of the sanctity of statutory provision and did not approve the judgment of the Orissa High Court and allowed the appeal.
cost.
09.05.2012 sailesh
(G.S.Sandhawalia) JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether rounding-off of marks below 50% in M.A. examination is permissible for promotion to Lecturer post irrespective of government rules.
Whether the respondents are required to exercise concession as a matter of right for petitioners with less than 50% aggregate marks.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mohammed Yusuf Vs. The State of Haryana & others (Punjab & Haryana) 1988 (7) SLR 241Relied on¶29
Kuldeep Singh, Legal Assistant, Punjab Financial Corporation Vs. State of Punjab 1997 (3) PLR 1Relied on¶31
Orissa Public Service Commission & another Vs. Rupashree Chowdhary & another AIR 2011 (SC) 3276Relied on¶31
Rakesh Kumar & others
State of Haryana
Director of Secondary Education
G.S.Sandhawalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
