IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 14082 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : NOVEMBER 16, 2009 APPERDEEP KAUR ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Ms. Sonia G. Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing appointment of Ramanjit Kaur (respondent No.5) as Geography Lecturer in pursuance to joining report dated 24.8.2009 (Annexure P-9), on the ground that she is less meritorious to the petitioner. It has been pleaded that the petitioner, being eligible for the post of Lecturer, having the basic qualifications, applied to be selected for Civil Writ Petition No. 14082 of 2009 2 the said post in response to advertisement dated 28.6.2009. A merit list was prepared in which the petitioner figures at Serial No.1. Ramanjit Kaur (respondent No.5) figures at Serial No.2. In the reply, the stand taken by respondents No.1 to 4 is that the College which conducted the selection process, was not aware of the orders passed in CWP 7882 of 2004 (Rajwinder Kaur and others v. State of Punjab etc.) decided on 11.4.2005. In such circumstances, the selection process was carried. Ramanjit Kaur (respondent No.5) was earlier continuing as a Guest Faculty Lecturer and was relieved on 10.3.2009. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that the petitioner claims appointment under the selection finalised vide merit list (Annexure P-4). The selection itself has been scrapped and, therefore, the petitioner would have no right. Ramanjit Kaur (respondent No.5) was earlier continuing as Guest Faculty Lecturer. In terms of the judgment rendered by this court in Rajwinder Kaur's case (supra), she has been allowed to continue. So far as the present petition is concerned, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner has no right because the selection itself has been scrapped. The petitioner, however, would be at liberty to file a representation to respondents No.1 to 4 to show that Ramanjit Kaur (respondent No.5) had not passed NET and, therefore, was not eligible to be considered for appointment, even as Guest Faculty Lecturer. This petition is disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation in regard to the alleged infirmity in the qualification of Ramanjit Kaur (respondent No.5). Respondents No.1 to 4 Civil Writ Petition No. 14082 of 2009 3 are directed to take a decision thereon within 2 months of receipt of the representation. November 16, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?