IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20324 of 2010 Date of Decision: November 16, 2010 Krishan .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana and others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. It appears that the petitioner being desirous of joining as Civil Judge (Junior Division), competed in the selection process. 2. The petitioner cleared the preliminary examination, however, could not make it in merit in the main examination. 3. By way of this petition, prayer has been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the condition of conducting viva voce for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division), in English. Further prayer made in the petition is for quashing the action of the CWP No. 20324 of 2010 [2] respondents in fixing qualifying condition of 50% marks in the main examination for the candidates belonging to the ex-servicemen category. 4. Prayer made in the petition is also for quashing the action of the respondents declaring the petitioner disqualified in the main examination. 5. Learned counsel has not been able to justify filing of this petition in challenge to selection process, after participating in the same. Learned counsel, in regard to the prayer for conducting viva voce in English only, has not been able to justify the stand in the face of the fact that under Rules & Orders of Punjab and Haryana High Court, Volume-1, Chapter-II, Part-A, judgment is required to be written in English. Learned counsel has not been able to justify the prayer also in view of Chapter-I, Part-N of Rules & Orders of Punjab and Haryana High Court, wherein English has been declared to be language of the High Court. 6. The selection of Civil Judge (Junior Division) requires qualifying condition of 50% and therefore, the most meritorious persons are required to be selected. Relaxation in the said requirement has also not been justified by the learned counsel. 7. It appears that the petition has CWP No. 20324 of 2010 [3] been filed only because the petitioner could not get sufficient marks in preliminary examination and has not been given the chance to take the main examination. 8. No ground for interference in extraordinary writ jurisdiction is made out. 9. Petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) November 16, 2010 JUDGE aj 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?