CWP No. 8588 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 8588 of 2009 Date of Decision: May 29, 2009 *** Ashok Kumar and another ...... Petitioners Versus Haryana Staff Selection Commission ...... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Anurag Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Ajay Tewari, J. The petitioners had applied for the posts of Social studies Masters. As per the advertisement the following stipulation was made:- “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.” Since there were much large number of candidates than the CWP No. 8588 of 2009 2 posts advertised the respondents made a provision of short listing as per which the average merit obtained by the applicants in the B.A. and B.Ed. Examination was to be the determinant. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that this process of short listing is irrational and arbitrary. As per the learned counsel the criteria of the selection includes the marks obtained in Matric and marks granted for additional qualification/experience. He argues that for the purpose of short listing also this was the only unarbitrary and rational criteria. It is, however, not disputed that the essential qualification for recruitment to the post of Social Studies Master is a graduation degree with a degree of B.Ed. In my opinion the method of short listing based on the marks obtained in these essential qualifications cannot be termed to be either unarbitrary or irrational. The argument of learned counsel that the marks of Matric, higher qualification, experience should also be added may no doubt be an equally unarbitrary option but this by itself would not render the prescribed process to be arbitrary. Consequently this writ petition is dismissed. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE May 29, 2009 sunita