ROSHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment, we dispose of as many as four writ petitions i.e. C.W.P. No. 78 of 1999 Roshan Lal v. State oCHaryana and others, C.W.P. No. 1044 of 1999 Vinod Kumar and another v. State of Haryana and others, C.W.P. No. 6712 of 1999 Rajen-der Singh v. State of Haryana etc. and C.W.P. No. 17871 of 1998 Laik Singh v. State of Haryana and others, as in our opinion all these four writ petitions can be disposed of by one judgment. Moreover, common question of law and fact is involved in these four writ petitions. Facts are being taken from Civil Writ Petition No. 78 of 1999.

(2.) Shri Roshan Lal, petitioner, has given challenge to the selection made by respondent No. 2 against the post of Learner Binders and has made a prayer that writ in the nature of certiorari be issued by quashing the appointments of respondent Nos. 3 to 14 and suitable directions may also be issued in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner against the post of Learner Binder as he was fully eligible.

(3.) The case set up by the petitioner is that he is Matriculate and has successfully completed 2 yeas Ap-prenticeship training in the Trade of book- binding conducted by National Council for Vocational Training, Ministry of , Government of India w.e.f. 4.3.1991 to 3.3.1993. He passed the Practical Trade Test held in May, 1993 in the trade of Book-binding conducted by National Council for Vocational Training. He worked for five years as Book-binder with leading printing and stationery firms of the Northern region. Departmem of Printing and Stationery, Haryana, sent a requisition to the Employment Exchanges for the purpose of making appointments against the five posts of Learner Binder. Advertisement to this ef-fect was also published in Dainik Tribune, Chandigarh. As per the advertisement, the candidates must possess knowledge of Hindi up to 8th standard; experience of one year of preliminary binding work and the candidates should have passed the practical test. The petitioner being fully eligible for the post, applied well in time, appending therewith copies of the certificates. About 700 candidates out of 2200/2300 candidates, appeared for interview on 12.8.1998. The interview commenced at 2.00 P.M. and continued up to 5.00 P.M. On the following day, the interview also took place from 10.00A.M. to 1.00P.M. According to the petitioner, the entire process of selection was a farce and a formality. About 700 candidates were interviewed in a period of 6 hours. The petitioner was also interviewed by the Selection Committee. Respondent-Director, on the basis of the selection list made appointments of respondent Nos. 3 to 14, who, even do not possess the requisite qualifications as per the advertisement. They simply supplied the experience certificates. It is also the case of the petitioner that the appointment of respondent Nos. 3 to 14 was against the requisite qualifications advertised in the advertisement and in these circumstances, their appointment is illegal and arbitrary. It was also the case of the petitioner that out of the selected candidates some candidates are the favourites of the high-ups.