Smt. Suman Dahiya vs Haryana Staff Selection Commission

Ajay Tewari, J.—On 31.1.2009, the following order was passed:

The petitioner had not concluded the course of D.Ed. up to the last date prescribed viz. 21.08.2006. Notwithstanding that fact she was not only interviewed but was selected and appointed also. Now by the impugned order her candidature has been cancelled on the ground that she did not have the necessary qualification on the last date. Mr. Yadav has argued that because of the appointment the petitioner had not only resigned from her earlier service as Guest Lecturer but she was also prevented from applying in response to a subsequent advertisement No. 4 of 2008 and so now the petitioner has been left high and dry for no fault of hers.

In the circumstances the limited prayer that he has made is that she should be permitted to apply in response to the said advertisement No. 4 of 2008 and her candidature should be considered. I find this to be a fair request.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Harish Rathee, Senior DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner undertakes to supply two copies of the writ petition to the learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana during the course of the day who prays for some time to file reply.

Adjourned to 06.02.2009.

In the written statement no ground has been mentioned to deny the petitioner the limited relief which she is claiming now. In the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to apply in response to advertisement No. 4 of 2008 and if she applies against the said advertisement upto 17.2.2009, her candidature will not be rejected on the ground of delay and she will be considered for appointment as per her eligibility and suitability.