C.W.P. No.15628 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 15628 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : 17.10.2011 Parmila PETITIONER VERSUS State of Haryana and others RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- None for the petitioner. Shri Harish Rathee, Senior D.A.G. Haryana. MAHESH GROVER, J. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that she be considered for appointment in the on-going process initiated by the respondents for filling up the posts of J.B.T. Teachers. It is the case of the petitioner that she had applied pursuant to the advertisement for the said posts, but her candidature had not been considered even though the application had been received by the respondents well within time. A grievance was sought to be projected in the petition on the ground that probably the petitioner was not being considered, as her application had not been received within time. C.W.P. No.15628 of 2010 -2- Notice of motion was issued and the petitioner was permitted to be interviewed provisionally. Reply has been filed by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (respondent No.2) in which it has been stated that the application submitted by the petitioner was unsigned and was therefore, ignored. The relevant conditions given in the advertisement are extracted here below :- 2. The candidates are advised that the photo copy of all qualifications should be attached with the application form. An application form will be summarily rejected in the following events :- (i) If a candidate makes more than one application for a particular category. (ii) If the application is not in the prescribed format appended with this advertisement. (iii) If the application is unsigned/incomplete. (iv) If full fee is not deposited in the manner prescribed or proof thereof not attached. (v) If the application is not sent through registered post. (vi) If the experience certificate is without detail of salary per month received (wherever the condition of experience apply). (vii) If the application is received in Commission's office after the closing date, HSSC will not be responsible for any postal delay. (viii) if a candidate does not possess the qualification of Hindi/ Sanskrit up to Matric Standard/Higher Standard. (ix) If a candidate does not possess the requisite academic C.W.P. No.15628 of 2010 -3- qualification on the cut off date. (x) If a candidate is underage/overage on the cut off date. (xi) If a candidate does not indicate visible identification mark in column 13 of the application form. On the previous date, learned counsel for the petitioner had sought time to file counter affidavit to the affidavit submitted by the Commission, which in any case, has not been done. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner today. Thus, the stand of the respondents has gone uncontroverted. In view of above, when the stand of the respondents is unequivocal and the advertisement explicit in its terms that incomplete applications shall not be considered and also keeping in view the observations of the Division Bench of this Court in C.W.P. No.6787 of 1998 titled Sunita Kumari v. State of Haryana and others decided on 27.10.1998, I am of the opinion that no infirmity has been committed by the respondents in ignoring the candidature of the petitioner. For the aforesaid reasons, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. (MAHESH GROVER) October 17, 2011 JUDGE GD WHETHER TO BE REFERRED TO REPORTER? YES/NO