IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 7520 of 2011 Date of Decision: 02.11.2011 Meenakshi Attri ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. **** SURYA KANT, J.(Oral) The petitioner applied for the post of Punjabi Mistress in the reserved category of Scheduled Caste (Ramdasia & others). Since the applications were invited 'on-line', the Certificate in support of the claim for reservation was not to be appended though it was required to be mentioned in the application form. The petitioner did mention that she belongs to the above mentioned reserved category. The petitioner also got issued a Certificate from the District Sainik Welfare Board, Gurdaspur on 07.10.2009 that she belongs to the above mentioned reserved category. The petitioner, however, was not called for the first counselling held on 04.11.2009. Consequently, she could not utilize the Reservation Certificate dated 07.10.2009. Meanwhile, some posts of teachers were advertised by the Department of Madhayamik Shiksha Abhiyan and the petitioner wanted to apply for those posts as well being a reserved category CWP No. 7520 of 2011 [2] candidate. As per the prevailing practice, the petitioner had to surrender her Reservation Certificate so as to secure a fresh one with a specific reference to the advertisement in response to which she wanted to apply. The petitioner was no longer left with the Scheduled Caste/Dependent of Ex-serviceman Certificate dated 07.10.2009 when she was called for second counselling on 16.7.2010. She therefore got issued another 'Lineal Descendent Certificate' dated 14.07.2010 but the respondents refused to accept the same as it was issued after the cut off date. In order to get the correct facts on record, the petitioner requested the District Sainik Welfare Officer, Gurdaspur to inform the respondent-authorities, who in turn vide letter dated 04.03.2011 (Annexure P-3) informed the Department of School Education, Punjab to the following effect:- “ You are hereby informed about the above cited judgment that Ms. Meenakshi Attri Roll No. 68586 D/o Ex-Hawaldar Puran Chand is resident of village Anial, Post Office Bamial, Tehsil Pathankot, District Gurdaspur. A certificate registered at registered Number 105/Steno/1212 dated 07.10.2009 had been issued to her by this office. Later on a certificate registered in register number 105/Steno/552 dated 14.07.2010 has been issued to her after depositing the earlier dependent certificate. Therefore, the earlier certificate has rightly been issued to her. Second Certificate has been issued to her after getting the prior certificate deposited.” (emphasis supplied) In the facts and circumstances of the case, it does appears that the petitioner could not produce the Dependence Certificate dated 07.10.2009 or any other certificate issued before the cut off date, for the reasons beyond her control. It is not the case where the CWP No. 7520 of 2011 [3] petitioner slept over the matter and allowed the grass to grow under her feet. She can not be penalized for the procedural wranglings being followed by the office of the District Sainik Welfare Board or the respondents. For the reasons aforestated, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents that they may, if so required, hold a fact finding enquiry in coordination with the District Sainik Welfare Board, in order to ascertain as to whether or not a Dependent Certificate dated 07.10.2009 was issued to the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner was issued such a certificate before the cut off date and/or that she continued to be a dependent of Ex-serviceman upto the cut off date, she shall be considered in the said reserved category as per merit. Needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Dasti. 02.11.2011 (SURYA KANT) 'ravinder' JUDGE