SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who had responded to the placement as Post Graduate Teacher for schools in Haryana applied for consideration of his candidature as ex -serviceman's dependent. The last date for filing the application with the eligibility certificate was on 28.06.2012 and the petitioner who had an eligibility certificate issued by the Sainik Board also furnished the said document. An interview was said to have been held subsequently on 04.01.2013 and the result was declared on 03.04.2013 when he was declared as selected.

(2.) IN the meanwhile, it appears that the petitioner had availed of the very same eligibility certificate and claimed an appointment in yet another establishment as a Clerk -cum -Junior Data Operator in Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak on 05.11.2012. Admittedly, the appointment that was secured was in the category of an ex -serviceman dependent. Subsequently, after the results were announced when he was to join, he was required to produce the eligibility certificate again and the petitioner appears to have applied to the Zila Sainik Board which rejected his claim on the ground that in terms of the policy of the Haryana Government, an ex -serviceman's dependent who was working in a Government department and asked for fresh eligibility certificate for a higher post will not be issued a dependent certificate again. The denial of certificate was, therefore, made on the ground that the petitioner who had used the eligibility certificate to claim appointment elsewhere cannot be favoured with yet another certificate.

(3.) THE counsel would refer me to the decision of the Supreme Court in Rekha Chaturvedi (Smt) Vs. University of Rajasthan and others : 1993 Supp (3) SCC 168 where the Court was considering the issue of selection of University teachers. The selection committee was required to take into consideration the requisite qualification as on the date of selection rather than the last date of preferring the applications. This judgment is sought to be used to this situation that the eligibility on the date of application alone was to be considered. I would find this reference as wholly inappropriate, for, in this case we have a government notification which renders ineffective an eligibility certificate if a candidate has already applied under such a category and secured an appointment elsewhere and seeks for better prospects in yet another establishment making use of the same certificate. The reliance on this judgment, therefore, cannot apply to our case.