BIJENDER SINGH ETC Vs. STATE OF HARYANA ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE PETITIONERS APPROACHED THIS COURT WITH A PRAYER THAT "THE WAITING HIT OF CLERKS MENTIONED BY THE SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD AS A RESULT OF SELECTION LIST ANNOUNCED ON 15.10.1989" FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE POSTS OF CLERKS IN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS IN THE STATE OF HARYANA BE QUASHED.IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE MOTION BENCH, THE RESPONDENTS, VIZ.THE STATE OF HARYANA AND THE SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE BOARD) APPEARED AND POINTED OUT THAT THEY WERE ACTING IN CONFORMITY WITH THE JUDGMENT OF A DIVISION BENCH OF THIS COURT (IN SUDESH KUMARI V.STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.), 1991 (1) R.S.J.

(2.) ON July 22, 1987, the Board advertised "some posts of Clerks for various Haryana Government Officers. " Factually, the Board had received requisitions from different Departments for a total of 662 posts. In pursuance to the advertisement, a large number of candidates submitted their applications. After conducting the written test, the Board selected a total of 5373 candidates on October 15, 1989. It recommended the names of 1692 candidates to different Departments. Certain persons, who were lower in merit were actually appointed, while others, though higher in merit, were not appointed as the department/s to which their names had been recommended were unable to accommodate them. Some of the candidates, who had failed to get appointment approached this Court through C. W. P. No. 8187 of 1990 (Sudesh Kumari v. State of Haryana and ors. ). A Division Bench of this Court accepted this writ petition vide judgment dated October 10, 1990. It, inter -alia, gave the following directions :

(3.) IT appears that the decision in Sudesh Kumari's case (Supra) was followed in some other cases also. As a result of the above noted directions, no posts of Clerks have been advertised by the Board after July, 1987. The two petitioners (Petitioner No. 3 having already withdrawn), who had been rejected by the Board, have approached this Court with the prayer that the list prepared by the Board on October 15, 1989 be quashed. They aver that the job opportunities available in the State of Haryana are "nominal" and it is likely that "by the time the waiting list is exhausted, they would be over -age and ineligible to apply for the posts. " According to the petitioners, the selection list prepared by the Board cannot remain valid forever and has to be 'scrapped'. Otherwise, the waiting list of 4000 candidates would last for a decade which would have the effect of depriving various eligible persons of the chance to compete for the posts of Clerks. They also aver that the list prepared by the Board was not fair. Persons, who had not applied for the posts in accordance with the conditions of the advertisement, had been selected for the jobs on account of extraneous considerations. Even those who had not appeared or had failed in the written test had been selected on the recommendations of the politicians "then in power" and "the candidates belonging to Meham and Sirsa Districts" were unduly favoured. It has also been pointed out that the selections made by the Board for the posts of Taxation inspectors were also arbitrary and an enquiry by the C. B. I. had been ordered by their Lordships of the Supreme Court.