Letters Patent Appeal against dismissal of a writ petition for appointment as Computer Teacher. Bench held appointment void as no open category posts were advertised despite RTI info on vacancies, denying equal opportunity to other general category candidates.
The appellant's appeal for appointment 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Letters Patent Appeal No.945 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision : May 20, 2013
Ankur Sharma
.....Appellant
versus
State of Punjab and another .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH.
Present : Mr.D.P.S.Randhawa, Advocate, for the appellant.
-.-
Surya Kant, J. (Oral)
This letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 4.3.2013 whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct his appointment as a Computer Teacher, has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.
The facts are indeed not in dispute.
The advertisement Annexure P-4 was issued by the 2nd respondent inviting applications for the posts of Computer Teachers. The advertisement reveals that all the advertised posts were for different reserved categories and none of them was meant for open category candidates.
The appellant admittedly belongs to open category, yet he applied in response to the subject advertisement. He then sought appointment on the premise that as per the information received by him under Right to Information Act, 2005, 349 posts of Computer Teachers in the open category are also lying vacant. Learned Single
LPA No.945 of 2013 (O&M) [2]
Judge has turned down the appellant's claim and rightly so holding that no post of general category was advertised against which the appellant could be selected or appointed. Suffice it would be to observe that in the absence of any advertisement, the other eligible candidates of general category got no opportunity to compete for the post(s) against which the appellant seeks his appointment.
No case to interfere with the impugned order is made
out.
Dismissed.
(SURYA KANT) JUDGE $ May 20, 2013 (R.P.NAGRATH) Mohinder JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant can be appointed to a Computer Teacher post when no open category vacancies were advertised.
Whether the Right to Information Act disclosure of vacant posts creates a legal right to selection if such posts were not advertised.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ankur Sharma
State of Punjab
another
Surya Kant
R.P. Nagrath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
