Anita vs Haryana State Public Service Commission

Augustine George Masih, J.—Petitioner has approached this Court praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the result declared on

31.12.2010 for shortlisting the candidates for the post of Hindi School Cadre Lecturer. Petitioner belongs to the backward class category and it is

her contention that she is entitled to be considered for shortlisting and her claim recommended for holding the interview as she has scored 71

marks whereas the general category candidates have scored lesser marks than her and, therefore, she is entitled to be summoned for interview as

the reserve category candidates cannot be put to disadvantage on merits.

Reply has been filed by the respondent wherein it has been stated that initially keeping in view the number of posts reserved for backward class

category Male and Female, for Lecturers School Cadre in the subject of Hindi, cut off marks for B.C. Male were fixed as 75 and B.C. Female as

The cut off marks for General Male and Female were fixed at 71 and 76 respectively. this Court in CWP No. 767 of 2011 titled as Preeti vs.

State of Haryana, which was decided on 24.05.2011 and in CWP No. 3280 of 2011 titled as Rajesh Shekhu vs. State of Haryana, decided on

15.09.2011, directed the respondent-Commission to revise the result of the screening test for recruitment to the posts of Lecturers School Cadre

keeping in view the principle that the reserve category candidates cannot be put to disadvantage and, therefore, they should be treated in the

general category and a fresh merit list be prepared on that basis. The revised result was prepared by the Haryana Public Service Commission and

according to this revised result, cut off marks for general category open and female category in the subject of Hindi had come to 74 and in the

category of B.C. Open and female category was also 74. Since petitioner had secured 71 marks and, therefore, had not secured the cut off marks

fixed under the general category as well as B.C. Category, was not entitled to be summoned for interview.

Case was earlier taken up for hearing on 04.01.2012, thereafter, on 10.05.2012 and then on 31.05.2012 when no one had put in appearance

on behalf of the petitioner. The absence of the counsel for the petitioner is understandable in the light of the reply, which has been filed by the

Haryana Public Service Commission. In the light of the reply filed, which has not been controverted by the petitioner by filing any affidavit or

replication, there is no merit in the claim of the petitioner since she has not obtained the minimum cut off marks which would entitle her to clear the

screening test and be summoned for interview. The writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed.