IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 9189 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION : JULY 30, 2009 SUBEDAR MAJOR (RETIRED) BALKAR SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Balbir Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, Punjab. Mr. Rajvir Singh, Advocate, for respondents 4 to 21. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Memo dated 25.1.2006 (Annexure P-13), issued by respondent No.3-Chairman, Departmental Selection Committee, through Principal Secretary. The petitioner, through this petition, claims the right to appointment as Bhalai Karmchari (Welfare Worker) with effect from 31.1.2006. Civil Writ Petition No. 9189 of 2007 2 In brief, the prayer of the petitioner is that the petitioner served in the Army for 28 years. The petitioner was employed in the office of Deputy Director, Sainik Welfare, Amritsar, in January, 2004, as Welfare Worker, on contract basis. Subsequently, he was adjusted against the post of Security Supervisor with effect from May, 2005, however, continued to perform the duties of Welfare Worker. Posts of Bhalai Karmchari (Welfare Worker) were advertised. The petitioner also applied for the said post within the stipulated time. The petitioner has not been considered on the ground that he was over-age. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner in para-8 of the petition that the petitioner was born on 9.5.1959, as is made out from Detailed Marks-Sheet of Higher Secondary Part-I examination (Annexure P-8). For the same purpose, Annexure P-9 has been placed on record to show the date of birth of the petitioner. It seems that even a legal notice was served on behalf of the petitioner with the same assertion that the petitioner was born on 9.5.1959 and, therefore, was required to be considered. The stand of respondents No.1 to 3, through their written statement by way of affidavit of Brig. (Retd.) I.S. Gakhal, Director, Sainik Welfare, Punjab, is that service conditions for the post of Welfare Worker in Sainik Welfare department are governed by the Punjab Sainik Welfare (Class-III) Service Rules, 1987. It being a government service, retirement age provided is 58 years. The date of birth of the petitioner is 9.5.1949 and, therefore, the petitioner would have attained the age of superannuation on 8.5.12007. Even if the petitioner had been in service, he would have retired on 31.5.2007. Civil Writ Petition No. 9189 of 2007 3 I have considered the issue. Although the claim of the petitioner is that the petitioner was born on 9.5.1959, a perusal of Annexures P-8 and P-9 indicates that the date of birth of the petitioner has been given out as 9.5.1949. The averments made on behalf of the respondents, if considered in this context, it becomes evident that the petitioner has no case to succeed on the ground that has been asserted. The writ petition itself was registered on 30.5.2007. Further, a perusal of the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, indicates that the criteria under which the petitioner applied, has been upheld by this Court while dealing with CWP 2526 of 2006 (Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and others) decided on 10.8.2007. It further becomes evident that the last candidate selected under Roll No.39 i.e. respondent No.5, secured 21.5 marks. The petitioner secured 20.4 marks, which was below the last selected candidate. In view of the above, I find no reason to entertain the petition at this stage. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. July 30, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?