IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1) C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 Geeta ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents 2) C.W.P.No.20240 of 2009 Sanjay Talwar ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents Date of Decision : 17.5.2011 CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : In C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 Mr. H.C. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. H.N. Mehtani, Advocate, for respondent No.3. In C.W.P.No.20240 of 2009 Mr.S.S.Dinarpur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana for respondents No.1 to 3. C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 -2- Mr.J.S.Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.5 Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate for respondent No.6. ..... MAHESH GROVE, .J. During the course of hearing on 16.9.2010 this Court passed the following order in C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 :- “An advertisement for filling up four posts of Drug Control Officers, was issued on 14.3.2008. Selection Committee was constituted by respondent No.2, which conducted an interview on 27.11.2008. Reference is made to a news report appearing in 'Rohtak Kesri' that on the basis of a complaint, the Health Department had conducted an inquiry and found that except for one candidate, the experience certificates of all the selected candidates were found to be fake. As per the report, the Department had thus not approved the selection of the selected candidates. Brother of the petitioner obtained an information under the RTI Act, and it shows that only one of the 4 selected candidates named Suresh Kumar had joined duties. It is also disclosed that no waiting list was prepared or received by the Department along with the selection list. The petitioner on inquiry learnt that first selected candidate had obtained 52.01 marks in aggregate and the last selected candidate had obtained 41.47 marks. There C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 -3- is, however, no information given about the marks obtained by other candidates, who were not selected. The Haryana Staff Selection Commission has issued another advertisement in November, 2009 for filling up three posts of Drug Control Officers on temporary basis. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with a prayer that she be appointed as the three persons, who were selected, were not eligible and were not appointed and she was available for appointment. In response to notice issued, written statement has been filed on behalf of the Commission. It is conceded in the reply that the candidates, who were selected at Sr. No.2, 3 & 4 were not issued appointment letters in view of the report submitted by the Inquiry Committee showing that these persons produced bogus certificates of experience. The stand further is that the petitioner had obtained 41.44 marks as against 44.66 marks obtained by the last selected candidate. It is disclosed that there are no instructions in respect of Group-B posts for maintaining any waiting list. In this regard, reference is made to a letter issued by the Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, dated 1.7.2008 (Annexure R- 2/1). It is, accordingly, stated that the Haryana Staff Selection Commission did not prepare any waiting list. Since the petitioner was neither selected nor shown in the waiting list, it is urged that the prayer made in the writ C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 -4- petition cannot be allowed for granting appointment to her. Counsel for the petitioner submits that when the persons, who were selected, but not appointed on the ground that they were not eligible or had submitted bogus certificates, the next in line should be appointed, even if no waiting list was prepared. Counsel submits that usual practice of preparing the waiting list or making appointment therefrom would not be relevant for consideration in such like cases as is the case in hand. I am not inclined to accept the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. Once only a select list was prepared without any waiting list, it is not fair to appoint a person who may be next in line on the basis of merits. Once the selected candidates were not appointed on the ground that they had submitted some bogus certificates of experience, the action would be justified. The selection is made on the basis of merit and the documentation is checked subsequent to selection. The department had been fair in seeking the documents and not offering appointments to those who were not eligible for the same though had been selected by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for appointment cannot be allowed. Even otherwise, it is not clear from the pleadings that she is next in line and could be offered appointment on the basis of merit. C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 -5- Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Before this order could be signed, another case C.W.P. No.20240 of 2009 where challenge was to the same selection came up for hearing. It is noticed that the respondent in CWP No.20240 of 2009 has taken a different stand and are maintaining that another inquiry is in progress. It is not categorically stated that the appointment of selected candidates is not being made. This change in stand in regard to same selection is highly objectionable. Accordingly, both the cases thereafter, are adjourned for 23.9.2010 further proceedings as per the order passed in CWP No.20240 of 2009. Let these cases be heard together.” Thereafter, with the consent of the parties, an inquiry was got conducted by the State Drugs Controller, Punjab, which has since submitted its report on 20.1.2011. According to the report, in the case of selected persons, namely Ms. Meenu Kataria and Girish Kumar, the certificates submitted by them regarding experience were found to be bogus. There is no challenge to the findings of the report submitted by the State Drug Controller, Punjab who was appointed to look into the matter with the consent of the parties. There being specific material against the said selected candidates regarding the submission of fake documents in support of the experience acquired by them, I am of the opinion that their appointment cannot be sustained. Accordingly, their selection as Drug Control Officer is set aside. The prayer of the petitioner in CWP No.19403 of 2009 is C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 -6- that once the selection of these candidates is set aside, she ought to be considered for appointment, is also misplaced. This Court had already opined regarding the contention that had been raised by the petitioner in this writ petition vide order dated 16.9.2010 and this was the only reason why the petition was kept alive because of the subsequent appointment of the Drug Controller, Punjab to look into the matter regarding the submission of certificates by the said selected candidates. In view of the aforesaid, C.W.P.No.19403 of 2009 is dismissed. In so far as C.W.P.No. 20240 of 2009 is concerned, it is accepted partially only to the limited extent that the challenge made to the selection of two candidates, namely Meenu Kataria and Girish Kumar is not found meritorious and consequently the same is set aside. As regards the selection of Suresh Kumar, who has been arrayed as respondent No.4 in CWP No.20420 of 2009, learned counsel for the petitioner, on finding no adverse material in the inquiry report against him, has given up the challenge to his selection. This petition also stands disposed of. 17.5.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss