Civil Writ Petition No.22666 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.22666 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 19, 2011 Akshat Rawal .....Petitioner VERSUS Haryana Staff Selection Commission & another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate, for Mr. Harkesh Manuja, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr. DAG, Haryana for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner belongs to BC-B Category being Gujjar by caste. In response to an advertisement issued on 7.12.2007, the petitioner applied for appointment to the post of Sub Inspector, Food and Supplies Department, Haryana, The essential qualification for the post is as under:- “i. Matric with second division or its equivalent. ii. Hindi/Sanskrit upto matric standard.” The petitioner being eligible applied for the said post. Subsequently, a corrigendum was issued on 21.10.2010 giving interview schedule for the post of Sub Inspector. The Commission adopted a criteria for shortlisting the candidates by providing cut off Civil Writ Petition No.22666 of 2010 -2- point of 45.24. Since the petitioner had not qualified by cut off point, he was not called for interview. He has, thus, approached this Court with the grievance that originally in the advertisement there was no clause relating to shortlisting of the candidates. The petitioner has also challenged the formula evolved for calculating the cut off points, which according to him is neither rational nor justified. Notice of motion was issued. Reply has been filed. The special instructions reproduced in the advertisement has been highlighted , which are as under:- “The prescribed essential qualification does not entitle a candidate to be called for interview. The Commission may short list the candidates for interview by holding a written examination or on the basis of a rationale criterion to be adopted by the Commission. The decision of the Commission in all matters relating to acceptance or rejection of an application, eligibility/suitability of the candidates, mode of, and criteria for selection etc. will be final and binding on the candidates. No inquiry or correspondence will be entertained in this regard.” The Commission has also made reference to para 6(d) of the notification dated 28.1.1970, which authorizes the Commission to devise the mode of selection and fix the criteria for selection of the posts etc. Reference is also made to large number of cases, whereby right of the commission to adopt a rational criteria has been upheld. Accordingly, it is prayed that the present writ petition may be dismissed as criteria formulated by the Commission would apply to all the applicants and is fair, just and reasonable. The right of the Commission to formulate the criteria has Civil Writ Petition No.22666 of 2010 -3- already been upheld by this Court in CWP No.8721 of 2011 (Narender & others Vs. Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula), decided on 14.7.2011. No occasion, thus, would arise to reconsider the issue in any manner. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. August 19, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH) monika JUDGE