PARVESH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ petition, the petitioner is praying for issuance of a directions in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to re- consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Constable (General Duty) (Male), as the petitioner has secured 53.80 marks which also are the marks secured by the last candidate.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 issued an advertisement for the purpose of filling up of 5000 posts of Constable (General Duty) (Male). In pursuance to the abovesaid advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of Constable (General Duty) (Male) under the BC-A category. The petitioner was called for physical screening test on 9/2/2019. The petitioner duly appeared in the said test and successfully passed the abovesaid test. Thereafter, the petitioner was called for interview- cum-personality test. The petitioner duly participated in the abovesaid test. The final result was declared by the respondents. As per the result, the petitioner has secured 53.80 marks in the BC-A category. As per the petitioner, the person who secured equal marks have been offered appointment, but the petitioner has not been considered for appointment. Aggrieved against the abovesaid action of the respondents in not offering appointment to the petitioner, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) The only contention raised by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that although the petitioner has secured 53.80 marks, which are the same marks secured by the last candidate selected under the category of the petitioner but the name of the petitioner has not been mentioned in the waiting list nor has been offered appointment.