ROHIT Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of CWP-10347 of 2020 and CWP-12514 of 2020 as common question of law and facts are involved in both the cases. For the sake of convenience, facts are being extracted from CWP-10347 of 2020, Rohit vs State of Haryana and others.

(2.) Petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondents to consider his claim for appointment as Constable with all consequential benefits from the date candidates lower in merit to the petitioner have been appointed and for a further declaration that instructions dated 13.09.2019, Annexure P-4, are not a hurdle in issuing of appointment letter to the petitioner.

(3.) Facts, in brief, are that the Haryana Staff Selection Commission declared the final result on 09.08.2019, Annexure P-l, in pursuance to advertisement No.08/2015 and recommended the name of the petitioner for the post of Male Constable (General Duty). The appointment letters were to be issued after the medical examination, which was conducted in January, 2020, wherein the petitioner was found to be medically fit. The character verification report of the petitioner was received by respondent No.3 on 21.01.2020. A letter dated 18.02.2020, Annexure P-2, was sent by respondent No.3 to the Director General of Police, Haryana (respondent No.2) seeking necessary directions regarding the joining of duty by the petitioner. In response, respondent No.2 informed that action be taken as per Government Instructions dated 13.09.2019, Annexure P-4. However, despite this communication, the petitioner was not offered the appointment to the post.