C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 20.04.2012 C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 Narpal Singh ....Petitioner(s) vs. State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) C.W.P.No.16617 of 2009 Jatinder Singh ....Petitioner(s) vs. State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.S.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate, for the petitioner in CWP No.16617 of 2009. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana. Mr.Atul Gaur, Advocate for Mr.Sumeet Goel, Advocate, for respondents No.3 to 37 in (CWP No.1868 of 2009 and for respondents No.3 to 53 in (CWP No.16617 of 2009). *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) By this order, I propose to dispose of two civil writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos.1868 of 2009 and 16617 of 2009 as the same selection is involved in both these petitions. Facts are being taken from CWP No.1868 C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -2- of 2009. Petitioner has approached this Court impugning the advertisement dated 23.7.2007 (Annexure P-1) vide which applications were invited for appointment to the post of Mali by the Forest Department, Haryana, on the ground that the said advertisement has been issued in violation of the Statutory Rules governing the service. It has been asserted by the counsel for the petitioner that as per the Haryana Forest Subordinate (Group D), Service Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as 1998 Rules), the qualification prescribed for the post of Mali is middle pass with knowledge of Hindi and three years' experience as a Mali in a Nursery whereas in the advertisement, three years' experience has been further qualified that it must be from the Haryana Forest Department/Government Nursery of Horticulture Department. His further contention is that most of the selected candidates and specifically respondents No.7, 17 and 51 do not possess the experience certificate of a Mali as per the advertisement as the experience certificate attached by them is that of Labourers and no date has been specified as from which date they were appointed and had worked for three years. It is on this basis that the petitioner had assailed the selection of the private respondents and has prayed for the writ to be allowed. Counsel for the petitioner in CWP No.16617 of 2009 contends that the petitioner has approached this Court apart from the ground which has been referred to above that he possesses experience certificate from a Government Nursery as a Mali and the other selected candidates possess experience from the Village Forest Committee, Lohani, District Bhiwani. C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -3- Since he possesses the qualification as per the advertisement, he was a better candidate and had a prior right to appointment than the selected and appointed candidates. On the other hand, counsel for the respondents, while referring to the affidavit dated 26.7.2011, filed by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Forest Department, Haryana, submits that the advertisement primarily had been issued with a clarification with regard to the experience from a Forest Department/Government Nursery for the reason that an experience obtained from a private Nursery cannot be verified as no records are generally maintained by such private nurseries. As regards the experience from the Government Forest Department or from the Government Nurseries, the records are properly maintained and as such, the experience certificates can be verified. With regard to the position of the experience certificates of respondents No.7, 17 and 51, it has been stated that the certificates were issued by the Village Forest Committee, Lohani, District Bhiwani which have been duly counter-signed by the Incharge, Range Forest Officer, Bhiwani range. The position with regard to its comparability with that of Government Nursery/Forest Department, has also been spelt out in the said affidavit. He, on this basis, contends that the present writ petitions deserve to be dismissed as there is no violation of the Statutory Rules. Counsel for the private respondents have also supported the experience certificate submitted by them on the same lines as the State Counsel and has justified the acceptance of the experience certificate. C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -4- I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the records of the case. The 1998 Rules in Appendix B provides the qualifications for appointment to the post of Mali which reads as follows:- APPENDIX B Sr.No. Designation of posts Academic Qualifications and experience, if any, for direct Recruitment Academic Qualifications and experience, if any, for appointment other than by direct Recruitment 1 2 3 4 1 to 4 xxx xxx xxx 5 Mali i) Middle Pass 3 years Experience as Mali ii) Knowledge of Hindi upto Middle; iii) Three years experience as Mali in the nursery.” The advertisement which has been issued by the respondents for filling up the post of a Mali reads as follows:- “1. The age is counted as on 31.7.2007. Relaxation in reservation is as per Haryana Govt. Rules. 2. Attested copies of Eligibility/Marks sheet/Date of Birth, caste etc. be attached with application form. 3. Do write the name of post, caste/category on the envelope of the application. 4. Attested Pass port size photograph be attached on the application form. 5. 3 years Experience as Mali. This experience must be of Haryana Forest Department/Govt. Nursery of Horticulture Department, Haryana.” C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -5- When looked at in the light of the Statutory Rules in the first blush, it may appear that the further qualification with regard to the experience prescribed through the advertisement by the respondents would over-step the Statutory Rules governing the service. However, when taken into consideration with the explanation submitted by the Chief Conservator of Forests in his affidavit dated 26.7.2011, the same appears to be quite justified. The reasons assigned in the said affidavit for qualifying the experience from the source have been spelt out by submitting that the private nurseries which issue the certificates do not maintain proper records because of which it is difficult to verify the authenticity of the said experience certificates. That in itself is in furtherance of achieving the object and purpose of the Statutory Rules which requires experience to be had for a specified post and by further putting a rider to the experience clause it only fortifies the claim of the candidates which can be verified and only persons having authentic experience can then apply for the post so that competent and skilled persons can be appointed. As regards the experience certificates of respondents No.7,17 and 51 are concerned, the same have been clarified in paras 7 to 11 of the affidavit which read as follows:- “7. That the respondents number 7, 17 and 51 who have been offered appointment are having the certificates issued by the Village Forest Committee (VFC) of village Lohani, Distt. Bhiwani counter signed by the incharge, Range Forest Officer, Bhiwani Range. C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -6- This Lohani Village Forest Committee (VFC) is registered by the Registrar of Societies, Haryana under “Society Registration Act 1860” (Amended by Punjab Amendment Act 1957) with the Registration No.2291, Year 2001-2002 on dated 27.11.2001(Annexure R-1). 8. It is the deliberate policy of the Forest Department to constitute village level institutions in order to involved villagers in the working of Forest Department, to have maximum participation of Rural people in the implementation of forestry works, protection of forests. These VFCs were constituted through a process of Participative Rural Appraisal (PRA) exercise, in which all the members of the village participate and constitute the Village Forest Committee (VFC) comprises of 9 to 12 members selected from among the villagers and Member Secretary shall be either Forester (Block Forest Officer)/ Range Forest Officer Incharge. 9. In order to involve the villagers under the policy of decentralization in the implementation of the forestry works, the department is executing the works through these village level institutions (VFCs) under the supervision of Range Forest Officers/Forest Department. This practice is being followed in the Forest Department throughout Haryana, there are more than 1500 Village Forest Committees (VFCs) through which, the works of C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -7- Forest Department are executed under the supervision of Range Forest Officers/Forest Department. 10. It is also important to mention here that this system of implementation/execution of forestry works through VFCs is in the practice since the year 1999. Finally in the year 2005, the department endorsed this vide PCCF letter No.A-IX-173/66-120 dated 27-4-2005 (Annexure R-II) that all the works of Forests Department will be carried out on piece rate contract system replacing the system of Muster Rolls which was closed down and in this way the works were started executing through VFCs under the supervision of Range Forest Officers (RFO)/ Forest Department. 11. The certificate issued by the Lohani VFC for the respondent No.7, 17 and 51 worked as labourers in the planting and maintenance of forestry species in the field as well as nursery for 3 years. Consequently these respondents No.7, 17 and 51 were engaged as labourers by the VFC, Lohani for executing the works of Forest Department and after working for 3 years in forestry plantation in the field, as well as in the nursery, it will be sufficient to gain the work experience/knowledge which is required/necessary to be considered for appointment as Mali. In the past also the same system was followed in the department while recruiting Malies. Such provisions C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -8- were made to entertain only the genuine skilled applicants of the trade as there is no specific training program available in the state to attain the qualification which could be considered for the appointment as Mali. Hence these certificates issued by Lohani Village Forest Committee duly endorsed by the then working Range Forest Officer were considered to be in accordance with the rules/provisions advertised for the appointment of Mali.” In the light of above, the justification put-forth by the respondents for qualifying experience and the experience obtained by the private respondents would leave no manner of doubt that there has not been any violation of Statutory Rules governing the service. Rules only lay down a minimum requirement which is three years' experience as a Mali in a Nursery but the employer is the best judge with regard to the type and nature of the experience required for appointment to a particular post which, in the present case, is the Department of Forests. The qualification of experience has not been diluted in any manner by the respondents but justifiable reasons as to why the experience certificate is required from the Haryana Forest Department/Government Nursery of Horticulture Department, Haryana, have been given which is quite in consonance with the requirement of the Department of Forests and appointments made in pursuance thereto and on the basis of such experience certificates as has been explained by the Chief Conservator of Forests in his affidavit dated 26.7.2011 clarifies the position and defines the stand of the respondents, C.W.P.No.1868 of 2009 -9- which is accepted. As regards CWP No.16617 of 2009, suffice it to say that since the experience certificate of the private respondents have been accepted to be in consonance with the statutory rules (as held above) and the claim of the petitioner viz-a-viz. the selected candidate has been duly considered but he has not been selected, this writ petition cannot survive. Finding no merit in these writ petitions, the same stand dismissed. A photocopy of this order be placed on record on the file of connected case. April 20, 2012 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE