In CWP No. 5617 of 2019, the petitioner sought direction to be treated under the General Category instead of SBC category for an Accounts Clerk post, citing a government order to advance SBC posts to General candidates. The Court noted the State had issued instructions accordingly.
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.
CWP No. 5617-2019
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 5617 of 2019 Date of decision : 03.04.2019
Inder Pal
......Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana and ors. ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr. Gaurav Jain, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana
RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)
Petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to treat him under General Category, as he applied under SBC category for appointment to the post of Accounts Clerk.
On 01.03.2019, this Court passed following order:-
Learned counsel submits that the petitioners participated for the post of Accounts Clerk, pursuant to advertisement dated 31.07.2014 (P-1) in under SBC category. The petitioner cleared the written examination and were called for scrutiny of documents and type test. The petitioner was called for counselling vide order dated 18.01.2018 being successful candidate.
Learned counsel submits that as per note in the final result, the posts of SBC category has been withheld by the respondents. The grievance of the petitioners before this Court is the posts of SBC category are now to be filled from general category candidates, in view of statement of learned State counsel given in CWP NO. 25983-2018, decided on 20.02.2019 titled as Krishan and others vs. State of Haryana and others
Gaurav Arora 2019.04.04 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CWP No. 5617-2019
2
and petitioner has to be issued appointment letter under General category. In the case of Garima Jindal v. HVPNL and another, passed in CWP No. 13384-2011 , it has been informed that the vacancies of SBC are now being filled up from General category candidates, as per instructions of the Government.
Notice of motion for 08.03.2019.
On asking of the Court, Ms. Palika Monga, DAG Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall supply copy of the petition to learned State counsel by today itself.
Learned State counsel shall get instructions that why petitioner has not been considered under General category.
Learned State counsel has informed that a letter has already been issued to the Commission on 05.03.2019 to treat all the SBC posts under General Category and fill posts accordingly.
In view of the above factual position, at this stage, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition.
Disposed of.
| April 03, 2019 | (RITU BAHRI) |
|---|---|
| G Arora | JUDGE |
| Whether speaking/reasoned | Yes |
| Whether reportable | No |
Gaurav Arora 2019.04.04 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be treated under General Category or Scheduled Backward Classes (SBC) category for appointment as Accounts Clerk.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Krishan and another vs. State of HaryanaReferred¶17
CWP No. 25983-2018, Krishan and others vs. State of Haryana and others
Garima Jindal v. HVPNL and anotherReferred¶21
CWP No. 13384-2011, Garima Jindal v. HVPNL and another
Inder Pal
State of Haryana and ors.
Riti Bahri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
