In  CWP-11590-2019-PUNJ HC- P&H HC asks Haryana Staff Selection Commission to recast revised merit list pertaining to recruitment for posts of Constables & Sub-Inspectors after candidates applying under orphan category claimed that marks were awarded arbitrarily & illegally
Justice Jaishree Thakur [16-05-2023]

Read Order:SOMBIR And Ors Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

Tulip Kanth

Chandigarh, May 26, 2023: In a case pertaining to the process of recruitment for filling up posts of Constables & Sub-Inspectors initiated by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission vide a 2018 advertisement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has come to the aid of candidates, who had applied under the Orphan category, by asking the Commission to recast a revised merit list with respect to such candidates whose marks had either been wrongly given or not given.

The facts, as being culled out from the 52 writ petitions, were that the process of recruitment for filling up 5000 posts of Male Constable (General Duty), 1147 posts of Female Constable (General Duty), 500 posts of Male Constable in Indian Reserve Battalions (IRBs), 400 posts of Sub-Inspector (Male) and 63 posts of Sub-Inspector (Female) was initiated by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission vide advertisement dated April 16, 2018. 

The petitioners herein, sought appointment, applied in terms of the said advertisement. On the basis of documents uploaded, the petitioners sought 5 marks, which were to be accorded under the Miscellaneous (10% weightage) Category (a)(ii). The said advertisement clearly specified that 5 marks would be given to a candidate, who is an orphan or a widow; a candidate being an orphan would be entitled to 5 marks in case the applicant is a first or second ward of the deceased, whose father died before completion of 42 years of age & if the applicant is first or second ward and then in that case his/her father had died before his/her completing 15 years of age. 

After the written examination was undertaken and the candidates cleared PST and PMT, the result was prepared and published. The petitioners found out that the marks under the ‘orphan category’ had either been wrongly given or not given, which grievance led to filing of the instant writ petitions.

It was the petitioners’ case that the respondents had  acted in an arbitrary and illegal manner while giving marks to the candidates under the orphan category. It was contended that the  petitioners had been denied additional 5 marks despite they were entitled to the same being orphan i.e. first or second ward of the deceased, whose father died before completion of 42 years of age and first or second ward and his/her father had died before his/her completing 15 years of age.

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Jaishree Thakur was of the view that there has been an error in giving marks to the candidates who were not entitled to be given marks beyond the criteria as mentioned in the advertisement. 

The Bench placed reliance upon an affidavit which contained the error committed on the part of the respondent-Commission in clear terms. It was stated therein that the Commission had already submitted a list of all 173 candidates (out of 1005 candidates), who claimed 5 marks on account of being Orphan and were inadvertently awarded by the Commission on the wrong reporting by the scrutiny committee despite the fact that there were various deficiencies in their respective claims in the contravention of rules.

In view of the fair submission made by the respondents that there was variance in grant of marks in orphan category by different Scrutiny Committee, the Bench opined that the merit list ought to be set aside in respect of the candidates, who had applied under the 2018 advertisement for all the five categories and laid their claim for 5 additional marks under socio economic criteria being orphan.

“So instead of setting aside the entire selection process and directing that the examination be conducted afresh, especially when there is no allegation of any corrupt motive or malpractice, this Court is of the opinion that only the process of re-examining and scrutinizing the documents as submitted by the candidates claiming the benefit of additional 5 marks on account of being an orphan be conducted afresh”,the Bench held.

The Bench directed the respondent-Commission to revise the result of all such candidates by strictly adhering to the criteria as specified in the advertisement regarding allocation of 5 additional marks to candidates claiming under the orphan category.