CWP No.3566 of 1992 1 IN THE HIGH OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.3566 of 1992 Date of Decision: 26.07.2010 Jaspal Singh ..Petitioner Vs. The Punjab University & Ors. ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod K.Sharma Present: Mr.R.N.Raina, Advocate, for the petitioner. None for the respondents. Vinod K.Sharma,J. (Oral) The petitioner invokes the writ jurisdiction of this Court, praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment to the post of Lecturer in Political Science in the Department of Political Science, Punjabi University, Patiala, in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the Punjabi University vide Ex.P.1 and P.2 i.e. on 7.9.1990 and 19.1.1991. Last date of submission of form was 3.10.1990 under Ex.P.1 and 11.2.1991 under Ex.P.2. The petitioner also seeks directions to the respondents to consider him for the post of Lecturer in Political Science against reserved vacancy for Backward classes, being a member of Lohar community, CWP No.3566 of 1992 2 which has been declared as Backward Class. Writ petition was admitted. No stay was granted. During pendency of writ petition, Smt. Surinder Kaur was selected, as Lecturer in Political Science by the Selection Committee. Case of the petitioner was, that she did not fulfill qualification, as she did not have requisite marks prescribed for being appointed lecturer in Political Science. The petitioner, also challenged her appointment. The petitioner in order to prove his case had summoned the proceedings of the Syndicate. In spite of the directions by this court the Syndicate proceedings were not produced. This may be for the reason, that writ qua challenge to her appointment, stands rendered infructuous, as she has already retired from service. In any case, her selection can not be set aside, as she was not impleaded as party to the writ petition, even after amendment of writ petition. This court in the absence of, she being respondent can not set aside her selection. As regards other prayer of the petitioner is concerned, that has also been rendered infructuous, as it would not be possible to direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner against an advertisement issued in 1990 and 1991. The petitioner, if eligible and interested, can apply for the post, in pursuance to future advertisement if any, to be issued by the University. Mr.R.N.Raina, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, however, contended that this writ petition deserves to be decided CWP No.3566 of 1992 3 on merit, as valuable right of the petitioner to be appointed was not considered at relevant time. Merely because the case has remained pending in this court, the petitioner can not lose his right of consideration sympathetically, as the University had failed to produce on record of the proceedings of the Syndicate, to shield the wrong situation. However, there is no force in this contention. Issuance of a direction to consider the case of the petitioner for the post of lecturer, is not possible at this stage, after lapse of so many years. Furthermore, there is nothing to show, if any seats are available. In case any post is to be filled, then the petitioner has a right to compete with other eligible persons. The contention that adverse inference be drawn against University for not producing the record is also of no avail as the selection of Smt.Surinder Kaur cannot be set aside, as the petitioner has not chosen to implead her as party. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contends that while issuing notice of motion, rights of the petitioner were protected, by an order that the appointment, if any, made to the post shall be subject to final decision of the writ petition. This plea also cannot advance the case of the petitioner, as the candidate who was selected stands retired, therefore, at this stage it will not be possible to set aside her selection and consider petitioner for appointment at this stage, as right of many candidates for consideration has arisen during this period, who are also to be considered for the posts, which CWP No.3566 of 1992 4 may fall vacant. The writ petition has been rendered infrcutous with passage of time. Disposed off accordingly. 26.07.2010 (Vinod K.Sharma) rp Judge