468 CNVP 4410 of2011 11 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CNlPIlo4410 of 2011 1 Dateof decisionl182012 SinghTiwana eee etitioner Versus stateof Punjaband others 0 e e CL CNP No 7747 of 2011 2 0 0 I SinghGhumman8 Anr O e e Petitioners C5 Versus I Stateof Punjaband others IeeRespondents Z CNVPllo10216 of 2010 3 I Simranjit SinghTiwana 9e Petitioner Clo Z Versus m Stateof Punjaband others I e e 0 Respondents 7 Z 0 BEFORE HONBLE MRS JUSTICE YA CHAUDHARY Presente Mr Jatin Salwan Advocate for the petitioner Ms Kavita Arora AAG Punjab Mr KapilKakkar Advocate for No2 M Aalok JaggaAdvocate for No 4 Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 469 0 4 CNVP4410of2011 21 It DAYACHAUDHAR J This judgment of rnine will disposeof CVP Nos410 of 20117747 of2011 and 10216 of2010 as same questionof Iaw IS involvedin all the cases However for the sake of convenience facts are beingtaken from CWP No4410 of 2011 L The presentpetition has been filed for quashing oforders 0 dated 302010 and 732011 64nnexures Pe7 and Pe81vide which CA I respondentNo has been recommendedfor appointment to the post t5 of Assistant Engineerinspiteof the fact that he IS ineligibleunder sportsmn quotaignoring the meritsof the petitioner Z In succinct the facts of the present case are that the r PunjabStatePower Limited earlier known as PSEBI I f advertised 125 posts of Assistant Engineers in variouS disciplines Z outof whicl 15 postswere for the Electronics and Communication clo categoryThe petitionerappliedagainstsportsquotafor the post of 7 Assistant EngineerElectronics and The written Z 2 test was conducted on 132009 and the petitionerqualifiedthe test m The petitioneraiongwith other candidates was calied for checkingof documents on 16 122009 RespondentNo2 vide Ietter dated 301 2009 called respondentNoA and one Singh VValiafrom spottscategoryfor interviewand also for verification of their originSldocuments on 161220094 clarification was also soughtbyrespondentNo 3 vide Ietterdated82010 whether these candidatesfulfili the eligibility criteria as per Recruitment Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 470 1 0 4 CN11PNo 4410 of2011 31 CJ Rules 1988 hereinafterreferredto as Rules 19881The name the petitionerwas also sent alongwlth two other candidates from spoltsquotaFeelingaggrievedwith the aforesaid Ietter respondent No as well as Singhwalia filed CMP Nos 4125 of 2010 and 3376 of 2010 respective4The petitioneralso filed applications under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC in both the petitionsto allow m him 10jointhe Duringthe pendency of CP No 3376 0 oof2010 sport cettificates of Singhwalia were found 0 0 forgedand writ petitionfiled by him was withdrawn In another 0 petitionbearingCWP No 4125 of 2010 responder3oardmade a I statetnent that case of JaspinderPal Virk is beingforwarded for Z appointmentagainstthe post reserved for spotts categoryand as 1 such the petitionwas disposedof havingrendered infructuousvide order dated 72011 The petitionerhas now challengedorder dated 7201 1 Z vn nexure P81 vide which the candidature of respondentNo for Ctl appointment as Assistant Engineeragainstthe post reserved for V Z sponscategorywas recommended declaring the petitionerineligible Qm on the I groundthat the of respondentNo 4is contraryto Rules 1988 as the oster pointreserved for sports categorycannot be filled up from any other source even In case of non of eligiblecandidatefrom sportsquota Learned counsel for the petitionersubmits that selection was to be made as per running roster as for the post of Assistant Engineeragainst100 pointroster four circles have been completed and five roster pointsare meant for sports candidateearned 1 6 Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 471 0 bp CNP No 4410 of2011 41 counsel for the petitioneralso submittedthat respondentNo 4 does not fulfill the and he was not eligibleand was wrongly for the post 01 Assistant EngineerElectronics and Communicationl It is also the argument of Iearned counsel for the thatthere were two claimantsfor the postwhich was to be filled up on the basis of relative merit Learned counsel for the 1 petitionerhas also relied upon the judgment of Honble the Apex r Court in State of Bihar 80rs Vs Mithilesh Kumar JT 2010 Sc 0 40 11and of this Courin SandeepSharma Vs State of Haryanaand I 0 others 2009 21RSJ 436 in suploortof his contentions Learned counsel for the on the basis of Z replyfiled submitsthat merit Iist was preparedas per para 60f the sportsgradationfoolicyand in case of ratinginter se the preference I in the same gradeis to be givenin the followingdescending order r il Winner iil Runner up Z 4 iiil Third positionholder vl Number of 00 Vmo Z m Learned counsel for the also submits that as per Rules 1988 3 0Ioquotafor sportscategoryhas been made for sportspersons and respondentNoA was deciared eligibl and was placedat Sr No 8 in the merit Iist One candidate nameIy SinghWaa could not be considered as his sportcertificateswere found forged RePI has also been filed by which is on record Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 472 Il r4 1 CNVP No44100f2011 51 Learnedcounsel appearingfor responden3oardsubmits that as pr decision of the Board a separatecontinued roster is maintainedfor each discipline e Electrical Mechanical Electronics and Comrnunication and ComputerScience In Electronics and Communitation discipline15 postswere advertised and 2010posts were reserved for sportscandidates and as per 100 point roster m postsat Sr No 23 and 100 are for sportscategoryOnly15 postsIrl Ct Electronid and Communication were filled up accordi ng to roster 0 0 pointLearned counsel also submits that all 15 postsas per running t5 roster has been filled up strictlyaccording to the meritand the name of the petitioner was not considered The petitionerappliedagainst Z Electron ics and CommunicationdisciplineagainstSponsquotabut as per said discipline no roster pointbetween 1 to 15 was for sports 0 categoryas only roster No23 41 and 100 are reserved for spolts I categorycandidates Z Heard the argumentsadvanced by Iearned counsel for CO the partiesand have also perusedthe impugnedorder as well as I7 z otherdocumentsavailable on the file an advertisementwas issued for fillingup the posts of Assistant Engineers meant for spons categorycandidates The petitioner was havingqualification of Bachelor of in Electronits and Communicatlon and appliedfor the said post Two other candidates i respondentNoI and one DamanpeetSinghalso appliedagainstsportscategoryBoth the candidateswere declared ineligible as per Rules 1988 Both of them filed CWPNo125 of 2010 and CWP No376 of 2010 beforethis A Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 473 0 6 CNVPIo 4410 of2011 61 coui1 and in looththe petitionspetitionera Iso moved an application under 10rder 1 Rule 10 CPC to join proceedingsDuringthe pendencyof CWF No 3376 of 2010 filed by DamanpreetSingh VV Il he sports certificates allegedlyissued to him were found forgedand writ petitionwas dismissed as withdrawn In CWP No 4125 of 2010 a statement was made that case of respondentNoA 1 was uner consideration for appointmentagainstpost reserved for r 0 spoi1scategorya nd the petitionwas dismissed as infructuousvide 0 order dated 7201 1 No sent the case of the I 0 petition6r as well as other candidates for assessingtheir eligibility The petitionerwas not found eligiblewhereas as per his case he Z was more meritoriousand should have been consldered againstthe advertisedpost I The of respondentNoA has been Z challengedby the petitioner on the groundthat the appointment IS contraryto the Rules 1988 and selection was to be made as per m runningroster Respondent No does not fulfill the and 7 Z was found ineligiblefor appointmentagainstthe post of Assistant EngineerInitially the case of respondentNo was considered and was found ineligible but subsequenyhe was declared eligibleIt IS also the groundto challenge that the selection to the postwas to be made on the basis of relativemerit Now the questionfor consideration before this Court IS whetherthe post meant for spot1scategoryis to be filled up onlyon the basis Of comparative meritof all candidates or it can be filled up on the basis of initia1 appointmentby the as the Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 474 0 d CPIlo 4410 of2011 71 spoitsquota has been divided as per diHerent discipiine Although there is a m6ntion in the sports policythat there should not be deviationfronlits guidelinesbut as per Ietterdated 182008 the process of and to streamline the process certain guidelineswere issued in suppoit of earlier policywhich reads as under 1 CategoryA C The GradationCertificateshould be awarded to the 0 0 il Medal winners of OlympicGames World Cup and Asian I t5 Games I iiIGradationcertificateshould be awarded onlyto the first three Z positionholders of CommonwealthGames Afro Asian Games and Asi8n I iiiIGradationcetlificate should be awarded to the participants of r World Cupand Asian Games Z ivIGradationcertificateshould be awarded to the of m Common Wealth Games Afro Asian Games and Asian IWA3 Z Qm vIGold Silver and Bronze medalist Ill SAF Games World University Games Junior World Asian School Games and InternationalNationaI Recognized where atlleast 10 teams participate Category il Gradation certificateshould be awarded onlyto the first three positionholders of the Senior National National Games Junior World All India Inter Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 475 r CNV No4410of2011 81 under 19 1 NationalSchool Games under 171A11IndiaRural Sports iiIAnd to the first three positionholders of Nationai Games whefe the competition held amongsteightor more than eight teams m State of Punjabhas also issued separatepolicydated 0 41992 which was revised on 141 993 and on 0 0 10 2 19971As per policythe reservation was givento the sports I 0 person at the time of admission as well as enteringinto the I Government Service As per Rules 1988 in case of recruitmentto Z reserve vacancy in Classmland Classmllposts the reservationistobe givento thOsecandidates who have won national In terms of individualevent while the State of Punjabor has won national in team or individualevent which was Z organizedby Indian OlympicAssociation and got 1S 2ndor 3 QO positionor won gold or silver or bronze at 1nternationalFederation em Z Affiliatedto IndianOlympicsCommittee itself The Petitionerhas claimed his righton the groundthat he IS National level sports Person and has representedthe State of Punjabat NationalIevel and was also a member of PunjabGold Medal WinningTeam in the year 2009 As per advertisementdated 122009 vanous posts of Assistant Engineerswere advertised under different and distinct disciplinesto be filled up Iike electrical electronics and communication mechanical and computersciencehe criteria for Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 476 P 1 ClNP N6 4410 of 2011 91 reservatlonof post mentioned was that the reservation would be m categorywise and discipline wise and actual number of postswill be worked Out on the basis of runningrostert was also mentionedthat no benefit to other categorywould be givenas the postswere to be filled up as per discipline adoptedbyeach candidate In the present case the post in questionwas reserved for categoryrelatingdisciplineof electrical The candidates 0 were to be possessedBachelor decree for the aforesaid 0 post in respectivedisciiplineand for the post of Assistant Engineer I O Electricallthe candidates were requiredto possess the degreeIn I electrical The petitioner is havingbachelordegreein electronicsand 4t Z communication whereas respondentNoA is havingbachelor degree r in electrical As per advertisement categoryonce filled in the applicationform will not be allowed to be changedmeaningthereby Z that no benefit can be givenfor the other category Since the petitionerhad applied Itl the category of Electronics and f and was to be considered onlytn that categorybut W3 Z he has claimed himself to be considered in the categoryof Assistant Engineer Electricallagainst the posts which respondentNo appliedThe Iist of all eligiblecandidates was preparedwho applied in the categoryof of electrical Respondent No was at Sr No of the Iist preparedin the categoryof Assistant Engineer ElectricallinsportscategoryCandidateat StIol and 2 were Ieft out for other reasons and respondentno 4 who is at SrIloA came at St No of the sportscategoryfor the post of Assistant Engineer 1 ElectricallTlle petitioneris at SI9 in the categoryof Electronics W0 Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 477 3 CNP Nol44100f2011 101 and Conlunication llhe stand taken by Iearned counsel for the hat meritof the petitioner was not taken intoconslderation at the tim of preparation of the Iist is not factuallycorrect as he was I e to be conidered orIyfor the postoofAssistant EngineerElectronics and whereas he was claiminghis post VlsvIS NoA who applied against electrical discipline 1 Respond6ntNo has approachedthis Coourtbyway of filingCWP No4125 of 2010 and that petltion was disposedof on the basis of 0 0 statementImade by counsel representingrespondentNoA The I 0 order pas6edin CWP NoA125 of2010 is reproducedasundeo I Learned counsel the respondentBoard 41 Z powercoml states that yesterdayonly the petitioners case for appointment has been approved and lforwarded to the DeputySecretaryServiceslfor issuance of f appointmentletter to him He further states that the Z Cr petitionershaOlthereafter be allowed to join his duties CQ e subjectto verificationof documents and antecedents etc 7 Z That in a way renders the writ petitioninfructuous Ll however the writ petition IS disposed of with a direction to the todo the needful within one month from today The petitioner after his appointmentrnayrepresentto the authoritiesfor of notional benefits vithoutclaimingany arrears of 1Paylfrom the due date Disposedof DastjIl The authorities relied upon by Iearned counsel for the Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 478 0 CNll4410of2011 111 petitionerare not applicabieto the facts of the present case Moreover the petitionerhas not challenged the advertisementissued by the Board Rather he had participated Ill the selection process and had Iost his rightto challengethe selection su bsequentlyThe petitionerhas not challengedthe advettisement issued by the respondentsand he Ill the selection process which 1 0 shows that he acceptedthe conditionslcriterionmentioned in the 0 On failure he filed the presentpetitionto challenge 0 the selection Moreover the petitionerbelongsto disciplineof I Electronics and communication and the post was for Electrical 1P disciplioe Z In view of the what has been discussed above there is no merit dn the contentions raised by Iearned counsel for the I petitionr and the petitionbeingdevoid of any merit IS hereby dismissed Z f r 18201 2 1DAYACHAUDHARYI W2 2 POOJa JUDGE C 61 9 rf Singh Gagan Preet 2014.07.03 11: 10 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document