IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.1396 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 13.12.2010 Veer Pal and another …..Appellants versus The State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Bijender Singh, Advocate for the appellants Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) By filing this appeal, challenge has been laid to an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 15.9.2010, dismissing CWP No.16568 of 2010, filed by the appellants-petitioners. The appellants are working as Guest Faculty Teachers in the State of Haryana. Respondent No.3 invited applications to make regular selection against the posts of Lecturers which were lying vacant. The petitioners applied for the same. Taking note of the large number of applications, it was decided by respondent No.3 to conduct Screening Test, for which a notice (P3) was issued. It is not in dispute that the petitioners, without raising any objection to the procedure adopted, have appeared in the Screening Test and failed. Thereafter, they raised their grievance by stating that they should not have been called for Screening Test. In this writ petition, the petitioners made the following prayer:- LPA No.1396 of 2010 “Civil Writ Petition under article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondent to exempt the petitioners from a Screening Test and call the petitioners directly for the interview as the petitioners are already working as Guest Lecturers at Rewari and it is further prayed that a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing a Screening Test for the post of lecturers on 12.9.2010 (Sunday) at Panchkula (Annexure P/3). It is also prayed that the result of Screening Test not be declared during the pendency of this writ petition.” It was sole grievance of the petitioners that while working as Guest Faculty Teachers, they had acquired sufficient experience and on account of that they should not have been called for Screening Test, rather they should have been called only for main interview to be conducted for this selection. Besides the above said grievance, no other grievance was raised in the writ petition. However, it was vaguely stated in the prayer clause that the Screening Test for the posts of Lecturers, to be conducted on 12.9.2010, be quashed. Their writ petition was dismissed vide the impugned order, by placing reliance upon an earlier order passed by the learned Single Judge, deciding similar controversy on 8.9.2010, in CWP No.16054 of 2010. At the time of arguments, counsel for the petitioners has tried to impress upon us that the eligibility of the candidates for the post of Lecturers should have been verified first and only thereafter, the eligible candidates should have been put to the Screening Test. 2 LPA No.1396 of 2010 Be that as it may, no such ground was raised in the writ petition. Possibly, at this stage, we cannot interfere on a ground, which was not taken/ argued before the learned Single Judge. Once, the petitioners have taken a chance and have failed in the Screening Test, it is not open for them to raise any objection against that procedure. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 13.12.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 3