Charanji Lal vs State of Haryana and Others

Augustine George Masih, J.—Petitioner has approached this Court assailing the action of the respondents-Haryana School Teacher

Selection Board-respondent No. 2 fixing the cut off marks as 56% in M.A. for being eligible for participation in the interview for the post of Post

Graduate Teacher (English) Mewat Cadre. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has a consistently good academic record and the

respondents have only taken into consideration the Post Graduate qualifications for fixing the cut of percentage for calling the candidates for

interview. This, the counsel for the petitioner contends, cannot sustain in the light of the fact that good academic record is one of the conditions,

which were initially advertised on 06.06.2012 and, therefore, the process of shortlisting resorted to by the respondents cannot sustain.

I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and with his assistance, have gone through the records of the case.

It is true that initially, good consistent academic record was mandated in the advertisement dated 06.06.2012, however, subsequently, a

corrigendum dated 03.07.2012 (Annexure P-3) was issued by the respondents where this condition of consistent good academic record has been

omitted. With this the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the respondents have resorted to shortlisting by only taking into consideration

the Post Graduate qualifications appears to be incorrect as a basic qualification for appointment to the Post Graduate Teacher now remains M.A.

In the initial advertisement dated 06.06.2012, the Board had, in para 13 of the said advertisement, kept a right reserved to itself for shortlisting

the candidates. Relevant portion thereof reads as follows:-

xxx

The prescribed essential qualification does not entitle a candidate to be called for interview. In the event of number of applications being large scale

the Haryana School Teacher Selection Board (SHTSB) may short list the candidates for interview by holding a written examination or on the basis

of academic criteria or percentage cut off to be adopted by the board. The decision of the board in all matters relating to acceptance or rejection

of an application, eligibility/suitability of the candidates, mode of, and criteria for selection etc. will be final and binding on the candidates. No

enquiry or correspondence will be entertained in this regard.

In the light of the above, the process of shortlisting resorted to by the respondent-Board cannot be said to be, in any manner, illegal or not in

consonance with the requirement of the advertisement. The writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed.