MINNI GROVER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner ranked 13th in the merit list for filling up of 114 posts of Medical Officers [Dental] advertised by the State of Punjab on 26th July, 2011. The criteria for selection comprised 95 marks for the written test and 5 marks for candidates belonging to rural areas. The written test was conducted on 16th October, 2011 and the result was declared on 20th October, 2011. After selection the counselling was due to be conducted on 16th December, 2011. One of the candidates, namely, Vinay Sharma filed CWP No. 21638 of 2011 titled Vinay Sharma v. State of Punjab and others in this Court challenging the award of 5 marks to the candidates of rural areas as unconstitutional. During the pendency of the writ petition, the State withdrew the weightage of 5 marks for rural area candidates on 6th January, 2012 and the writ petition was rendered infructuous and consequently dismissed as such on 16th February, 2012.

(2.) THIS paved the way of issuance of appointment orders on 7th September, 2012 to the selected candidates. Trouble began for the petitioner when on the last date of submission of applications in the advertisement, was on August 19, 2011, she admittedly had not passed the matriculation examination with Punjabi as one of the compulsory or elective subject or any other equivalent examination in Punjabi language which was the 4th condition of the terms of the advertisement dated 26th July, 2011 [P -1] issued by the Directorate of Health and Family Welfare Punjab, Chandigarh calling applications from eligible candidates for filling up several categories of posts in consolidated form including that of Medical Officers [Dental] which is the post in question. Indisputably, the petitioner holds the Bachelor's degree in Dental Surgery from a University recognized by the Dental Council of India and was registered in Part 'A' of the register maintained by the Punjab State Dental Council and was otherwise eligible for consideration in terms of the Public Notice. She, however, passed the Punjabi examination at matriculation level in March, 2012 during the currency of the recruitment process.

(3.) IT is her case that persons lower in merit than her have been appointed and are working on the posts but the petitioner despite being higher in merit than the candidates selected and appointed has failed to secure an appointment to service on the ground of not having acquired the necessary qualification by possessing proof of Punjabi knowledge.