SANTOKH SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) The petitioners who are ex-servicemen were appointed as Clerks on ad hoc basis have prayed for issuance of appropriate directions to the respondents to appoint them permanent in view of the instructions issued by the Government of Haryana being Annexures P/3 and P/4 applicable to the Disabled Ex-servicemen and further grant them all consequential benefits. It is submitted that in view of Annexure P/4, the petitioners were not obliged to be subjected to any test and were required to be regularised by the respondent-Subordinate Services Selection Board. It is not disputed that the number of Ex-Servicemen exceeded the posts which were available for being regularised. It has already been held by this Court in Naib Subedar Babu Lal Nagina Vs. State of Haryana and another, 1992(3) SCT 565 (P&H)(DB) : 1992(4) SLR 470 (Pb. & Hry.) that the purpose of providing a test for making selection to the post is to select from suitable candidates for the particular post available out of the number of suitable candidates. If the number of candidates is more than the number of posts to be filled, the authorities can provide for a written. test for selecting the suitable persons. On the basis of the test held, the respondents have the liberty to make the selection on the basis of the merit. The petitioners themselves have filed Civil Writ Petition No. 7938 of 1981 in this Court which was disposed of by the Division Bench on 31.10.1991 holding :

(3.) Having failed to qualify the test, the petitioners can have no grievance regarding the holding of the test particularly in view of the judgment of the Court in Babu Lal Nagina's case (supra) and the judgment delivered in Civil Misc. No. 3125 of 1992 in Civil Writ Petition No.-2662 of 1992 'Moji Ram Vs. State of Haryana decided on 24.4.1992 there is no merit in the writ petition, the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. This judgment would, however, not prevent the respondent-authorities from considering the case of the petitioners for regularisation if permissible under the Rules and the instructions issued in that behalf. Petition dismissed.