RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of mandamus to the official respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Social Education and Panchayat Officer.

(2.) Briefly put, Subordinate Services Selection Board, Haryana, advertised 20 posts of Social Education and Panchayat Officer. In pursuance to the advertisement, the petitioner applied and was selected. The petitioner was at No. 9 in the order of merit (Annexure P-2). Appointment letter was also issued. It so happened that in the meantime the petitioner was also selected as Excise & Taxation Inspector and so the petitioner did not accept the offer. Selection of Excise & Taxation Inspector was challenged before this Court and his selection was upheld by this Court. The apex Court, however, quashed the selection and so the services of the petitioner along with other candidates were terminated. Since the services of the petitioner were terminated in view of the order of the Supreme Court of India, the petitioner again represented to respondent No. 2 that he may be permitted to join as Social Education and Panchayat Officer on compassionate grounds. The petitioner's representation is Annexure P-4 to the writ petition. In his subsequent representation, the petitioner highlighted the fact that another person who was at Serial No. 11 in the merit list - respondent No. 3 - who like the petitioner had also been selected as Excise & Taxation Inspector, has been permitted to join as Social Education and Panchayat Officer on 26.7.1994, Annexure P-6. Similarly, other selected persons who were lower in merit were permitted to join as Social Education and Panchayat Officer. It is with these broad averments that the petitioner prayed that the action of the official respondents in not allowing the petitioner's claim for appointment is per se illegal, unjust, unfair and discriminatory.

(3.) Written statement had been filed by Sh. Sukhbir Singh, Joint Director Panchayats, Haryana, on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2. By way of preliminary objections, it has been stated that since the petitioner rejected the offer for appointment to the post of Social Education and Panchayat Officer in the year 1991, the petitioner has no right to approach this Court by way of present writ petition. On merit, it was stated that the petitioner on his own informed the concerned authority that he does not wish to be appointed to the post of Social Education and Panchayat Officer. This communication is dated 4.4.1991. This being so, the. present claim to be appointed is not only belated but otherwise devoid of merit. As regards appointment of other persons like Sh. Subhash Chander and Sunhera Singh, it was stated that these persons represented for their appointment which matter was considered and after giving necessary relaxation, both of them were considered and appointed.