LPA No. 989 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 989 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 09, 2011 Kuldeep Singh …Appellant Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment dated 08.02.2011 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the appellant did not have the qualifications of M.A/ M.Ed., which were necessary requirement as per advertisement dated 30.01.2007 (P-1). The learned Single Judge also upheld the view of the respondent as expressed in the letter dated 29.07.2008 (P-15). According to the respondent, prescribed qualification for the post of Lecturer in Education for teaching of physical education is 50% marks in M.P.Ed., M.Ed. with at least 55% marks which appellant lacked. Accordingly, the recommendations made by the Selection Committee could not be approved by Kurukshetra University. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at a LPA No. 989 of 2011 (O&M) -2- considerable length and are of the view that it is no doubt true that the appellant possess educational qualification of matric, 10+2, B.A., M.P.Ed., M.Phil and M.Sc. (Computer Science) and is also pursuing his P.hd. programme. It is equally true that he lacks M.Ed./ M.A. (Education) with 55% marks. According to the advertisement, the aforesaid qualification is essential and the learned counsel for the appellant conceded that the appellant neither had M.Ed. nor M.A. Accordingly, findings recorded by the learned Single Judge do not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference of this Court. The appeal is wholly without merit and does not deserve admission. 3. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. 4. Keeping in view the dismissal of appeal on merit, no orders are required to be passed on the application seeking condonation of delay of 5 days in filing of the instant appeal. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE August 09, 2011 Atul