High CourtsSingle Bench

Sanjeev Kumar and Others vs State of Haryana and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 20 May 2014 · Citation: (2014) 05 P&H CK 0563

HON’BLE JUDGES
Augustine George Masih, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 10809 of 2011
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 261 words

Augustine George Masih, J.—Petitioners have approached this Court praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the diploma/certificate of Sanitary Inspector (Health) obtained by the petitioners at par and equal to the diploma of Multipurpose Health Worker (Male) {for short ''MPHW (Male)}. Prayer has also been made for accepting the applications of the petitioners which they had submitted in pursuance to the advertisement dated 18.12.2010 issued by the respondents.

2.

Counsel for the State has produced the order passed by this Court in CWP No. 11060 of 2012, titled as ''Dharmender Singh & another Vs. State of Haryana another'', decided on 28.03.2012, where a similar prayer made on similar grounds has been considered and rejected by the Court.

3.

Counsel for the State has further produced an order passed by the Division Bench in CWP No. 2629 of 2014, titled as ''Dharmender & others Vs. State of Haryana & others'', decided on 12.02.2014, where the petitioners had approached the Division Bench challenging the vires of the statutory rules which restricted the qualification for appointment to the post of MPHW (Male) only to the persons who possess the training of Multipurpose Health Worker recognized by the State of Haryana. The challenge in the said writ petition has been negated and according to this judgment, the qualifications as provided for under the statutory rules will prevail.

4.

Counsel for the petitioners has not come present.

5.

In the light of the above two judgments, there is no merit in the present writ petition, the same, therefore, stands dismissed.