NARESH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has challenged the selection list/result dated 18.06.2013 for the post of District Ayurvedic Officer (Group -B) in Health & Ayush Department Haryana, on the ground that the criteria adopted by the Haryana Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') is arbitrary, illegal and not in consonance with the statutory rules. Challenge is also posed on the ground that the petitioner who possesses Masters in Medicines (M.D.) and having the preferential qualification should have been appointed over and above selected candidates i.e. respondents 4 and 5 who only possess the minimum requisite qualifications. An additional ground has been taken that the Selection Committee has not been rightly constituted as the Expert Member did not possess Post -graduation qualification.

(2.) PETITIONER is working as a Ayurvedic Medical Officer in Government of Himachal Pradesh since the year 1999. He has an experience of 13 years and has also completed his Doctor of Medicine (M.D. Panchkarama) from National Institute of Ayurveda, Jaipur. An advertisement was issued by the Commission inviting applications for the posts of District Ayurvedic Officer (Group -B) in Health and Ayush Department Haryana. The last date for submission of the applications was 30.11.2011. Out of the total four posts advertised, two were for the general category and one each for Scheduled Castes and Backward Castes categories. The essential qualifications being fulfilled by the petitioner and also having Doctor in Medicine, the preferential qualification, petitioner applied for the said post through proper channel. 41 applications from the general category candidates were received by the Commission and the petitioner was called for interview vide letter dated 05.07.2012. The date of interview was 18.07.2012. The Interview Committee consisted of three persons, Members -cum -Acting Chairman, Member and an Expert of the field. According to the averment of the petitioner, the Expert present at the time of interview of the petitioner was having qualification of B.A.M.S. only. Assertion is that the interview was an eye -wash and no reasonable criteria was formulated or followed by the Selection Committee. He appeared and performed well in the interview. The result was declared in the month of June, 2013 where the name of petitioner did not figure and respondents 4 and 5 were selected against the posts meant for the general category. He came to know thereafter that they were not possessing the preferential qualification of Master in Medicine but were only B.A.M.S. pass. Petitioner after obtaining the information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, has filed the present writ petition challenging the selection and appointment of respondents 4 and 5.

(3.) IT is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that as per the advertisement, the qualifications prescribed for the post apart from the essential qualifications mentioned, the preferential qualification as Doctor of Medicine in Ayurveda or Post -graduate in Ayurveda. Since the petitioner possessed Doctor of Medicine (M.D. Panchkarama) and thus possessing the preferential qualification was required to be selected and appointed over and above respondents 4 and 5 who were only B.A.M.S. pass. He contends that the preferential qualification would confer a right of selection upon the petitioner and for this assertion he places reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs. P. Dilip Kumar and another,1993 3 RSJ 27.