The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a writ petition filed by a candidate challenging the rejection of her application for a PGT Hindi post. The court held that eligibility must be assessed as of the application closing date, and the principle of rounding off was not applicable.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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. 449 of 2013 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 449 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of decision: 11.01.2013
Sonia Shama
...... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana & others
..... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present: Mr. Ramendera Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral)
The Haryana School Teachers Selection Board issued an advertisement dated 07.06.2012 (Annexure P-1) inviting applications for direct recruitment to various posts of PGT and HES-II (Group 'B' Services). In this very advertisement, 1700 posts of PGT Hindi were also advertised. As per advertisement, the closing date for submission of online applications was 29.06.2012. It so transpires that in pursuance to a corrigendum issued thereafter, the last date of submission of applications was extended to 15.07.2012. Insofar as the post of PGT Hindi is concerned, the essential qualifications prescribed in the advertisement were M.A. Hindi with atleast 50% and B.Ed. from a recognized university.
It is asserted that the petitioner possesses the qualification
CWP No. 449 of 2013 (O&M)
-2-
of M.A. Hindi having secured 53.08% marks and had submitted her application prior to the stipulated closing date for submission of the application for the post of PGT Hindi as she also possessed the B.Ed. qualification from recognized university. On account of the fact that the applicants for the post of PGT Hindi were in excess of the posts advertised, the respondent-board resorted to exercise of short listing whereby cut off 54% was applied i.e. candidates possessing 54% marks in M.A. Hindi were to be now considered for the post in question i.e. PGT Hindi. It is against such factual background that the present writ petition has been filed raising a claim that the petitioner be also called for interview for the purposes of recruitment and appointment to the post of PGT Hindi.
Learned counsel would vehemently argue that having initially secured 53.08% marks in M.A. Hindi, she has thereafter chosen to improve her result and accordingly had made second attempt in the examination on 02.06.2012 for which the result was declared on 19.12.2012 in which she had secured 60% marks. As such, the precise argument raised is that since the second attempt towards improvement was made prior to the last date of submission of the application form, as such, it is the improved result that is to be taken into reckoning as regards the eligibility and consideration for the post of PGT Hindi. The second submission raised is that since the cut off applied was 54% marks and even if the original result was taken into account, the principle rounding off be applied and 53.08% marks be taken as 54%.
CWP No. 449 of 2013 (O&M)
-3-
Having heard counsel for the petitioner at length and having perused the pleadings on record, I find that the present writ petition merits dismissal.
It is by now well settled that the eligibility in relation to the post concerned is to be seen as per the last date of submission of application form as stipulated in the advertisement inviting applications. There is no dispute as regards the factual aspect that the closing date for submission of online applications was 29.06.2012 and thereafter was extended to 15.07.2012. The petitioner had submitted her application relying upon the qualification of M.A. Hindi in which she had secured 53.08 marks. It is such percentage which would be relevant as regards her consideration for the post of PGT Hindi is concerned. Even though, the petitioner has chosen to improve her result in terms of attempting the examination second time prior to the last date for submission of the application forms i.e. 29.06.2012 but such aspect would be of no consequence inasmuch as the result pertaining to the second attempt towards improvement was declared only in December 2012 i.e. much later in point of time to the closing date for submission of the application form. The prayer of the petitioner can not be allowed as in such matters no selection could ever be finalized as the improved results of various candidates would keep pouring in. As such, the submission as regards the improved result of 60% to be taken into account which was declared in December 2012 is without merit and is rejected.
CWP No. 449 of 2013 (O&M)
-4-
Even as regards the benefit of rounding off is concerned, the counsel has not been able to point out any provision/condition in the advertisement dated 07.06.2012 (Annexure P-1) whereby such exercise can be resorted to. The petitioner has also not been able to make out a case of discrimination as regards any candidate having been granted the benefit of such rounding off.
For the reasons recorded above, the present writ petition is
dismissed
January 11, 2013 (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) harjeet JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a candidate who reapplied for an examination after the application submission deadline could claim eligibility based on the improved result declared later.
Whether the principle of rounding off should be applied to the petitioner’s percentage marks in the absence of a specific advertisement provision.
Sonia Shama
State of Haryana
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
