IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.5633 of 2011 Date of decision : 30.3.2011 Ankit Kaushik ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.N.C.Kinra, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with a prayer to quash the order Annexure P-8. His case is that he had applied for the post of Inspector in the Haryana Police while responding to the advertisement issued on 2.5.2008. He was thereafter called upon to undergo the written test which he cleared and subsequent thereto he was required to take the physical test which was conducted by the respondents on 3.3.2009. The physical test comprised of four tests out of which the petitioner was able to qualify three, but failed to qualify the high-jump. The said selection was challenged by way of CWP No.9265 of 2009, which was decided on 21.7.2009. The petitioner also assailed the same by way of CWP No.9542 of 2009. The writ petition was disposed of by passing the following order :- C.W.P.No.5633 of 2011 -2- “Counsel for the petitioners, thus, would contend that they would be satisfied if permitted to make a representation in this regard. Let the petitioners make a representation to the Commission and the Commission would be at liberty to pass any order in accordance with law and may in its discretion re-conduct the physical test as one time measure as held out in the communication, copies of which are kept on record of the each writ petition in the form of photostat.” The petitioner then made a detailed representation which was unheeded and resulted in submission of legal notice by the petitioner. The petitioner then once again filed CWP No.19132 of 2009 which was disposed of in the following terms : “In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to take decision on the representation (Annexure P-4) and the legal notice (Annexure P-5) in terms of the order dated 21.7.2009 passed in CWP No.9542 of 2009 within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the competent authority.” The petitioner then submitted another detailed representation along with the copy of the order which was passed by this Court. Since the petitioner did not receive any indication, he filed contempt petition bearing No.817 of 2010 which was withdrawn to challenge the impugned order Annexure P-8. Another civil writ petition was filed bearing No.2738 of 2011 in which the petitioner C.W.P.No.5633 of 2011 -3- had erroneously made a prayer directing the respondents to decide his representation and legal notice which actually stood decided by virtue of Annexure P-8. The petitioner then sought permission to withdraw the said writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one. The instant writ petition is an outcome of the earlier endeavours of the petitioner which have been detailed above. Assailing Annexure P-8 learned counsel for the petitioner contended that his representation has been unfairly decided as none of the issues raised by him has been decided by the Commission. On due consideration of the matter the Court finds that the substantial relief that the petitioner seeks is the appointment as an Inspector in Haryana Police. The Commission after the decision of CWP No.9262 of 2009 and other connected writ petitions had decided to re-conduct the physical test of all the candidates who had assailed the selection and had apprised all such persons to submit themselves to physical test once again. The petitioner too was likewise intimated vide registered letter No.1/60/2009-3S/2427dated 13.8.2009 to appear for the physical test on 24.8.2009 at Police Lines, Ambala City. The petitioner failed to appear for the test. The Commission thus refused to grant the prayer of the petitioner. Before this Court the only explanation given for non- appearance of the petitioner is that he had cleared three out of four tests but in the subsequent exercise of re-conducting the physical test he was expected to participate in the entire process once again. This to the mind of the Court is not acceptable and justifiable excuse for not participating in the opportunity given by the Commission for re- C.W.P.No.5633 of 2011 -4- conducting the physical test more so when in the earlier writ petitions the entire selection had been challenged on the ground of irregularities committed during the process of selection. The Commission was thus seeking to rectify and erase any further scope of mischief in the selection of the petitioner due to his own conduct having not participated which has certainly lost his right to be considered for the post of Inspector. Dismissed. 30.3.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss