KAMLESH RANI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-Kamlesh Rani has filed the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of impugned order dated 30.7.2012 (Annexure P-14) passed by the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Punjab, whereby, her claim for appointment to the post of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Female) was rejected by wrongly stating that meritorious SC candidates have been considered under General Category, whereas, the said facts were found to be incorrect on receiving information under RTI. A further prayer has also been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment against the vacant posts which had fallen vacant after considering the appointment of meritorious SC (2) candidates, who were higher in merit than the last selected candidate in the General Category.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition are that a public notice dated 28.5.2006 inviting applications for 208 posts of Multi Purpose Health Workers (Female) and 656 posts of Multi Purpose Health Worker (Male) on consolidated salary of L 5000/- was published in 'Daily Ajit'. As per advertisement, the essential qualification for the post of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Female) was that the candidate must have passed matriculation or its equivalent examination with science from recognized University/Institution, Diploma in Multi Purpose-health Worker (Male/Female) from a recognized Board/University and must have passed Punjabi upto matric standard. The petitioner finding herself to be eligible for the aforesaid post applied under SC category and was called for interview on 23.8.2006 under Roll No. 3045. However, the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Punjab issued public notice for postponement of the interviews scheduled from 7.8.2006 to 24.8.2006. Thereafter again an advertisement was published on 31.8.2006 in the Punjab Kesari inviting applications for various posts including 656 posts of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Male) and 208 posts of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Female). A note was also given in the said advertisement that the candidates who have already applied need not apply again and their earlier applications would be considered. Thereafter, a public notice was issued on 23.12.2006 for calling the candidates whose percentage of marks was equivalent to or above the cut off percentage mentioned against various categories after preparing the merit list for scrutiny of their original documents. Meaning thereby, the merit list was prepared after scrutinizing the applications and documents for the posts of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Male) and Multi-purpose Health Worker (Female) on the basis of marks obtained in Diploma. The posts belonging to SC category were bifurcated among SC (M&B) and SC (R&O) category for Multi-purpose Health Worker (Female). According to public notice dated 23.12.2006, the respondents while considering the candidates under General Category for the post of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Female) called the candidates who secured merit No. 78.331 to 93.78, whereas, the candidates who secured merit between 75.67 to 81.89 were considered under SC (M&B) category. Similarly candidates who secured merit between 77.11 to 85.22 were considered under SC (R&O) category. The petitioner, who belongs to SC (R&O) category and scored merit of 76.55 was not considered, however, under SC (M&B) category candidates who secured merit of 75.67 were considered for the post of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Female).

(3.) When the petitioner was not called for scrutiny of original documents, she visited the office of respondent No.2 but her request for interview was not acceded to. Thereafter, respondent No.2 allowed the selected candidates to join their duties on 30.12.2006. The action of respondents No.1 and 2 in not considering the Scheduled Castes Candidates in open merit was challenged before this Court by way of filing C.W.P. No. 4296 of 2007 titled as Sarabjit Singh and another v. State of Punjab and others, which was disposed of on the undertaking given by the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Punjab that the petitioners of said petition would be given appointment on contract basis as per terms and conditions on which respondents No.3 to 7 in said petition were working. On the basis of said undertaking, appointment letter was issued to one Sarabjeet Singh-petitioner No.1 but rejected the claim of Tilak Raj petitioner No.2 in the aforesaid petition stating therein that he did not fulfill the qualification for being considered for the post of Radiographer in the General category due to over age. Thereafter an application was moved in the said petition, which was disposed of on the basis of statement made by the State counsel to the effect that all the petitioners would be adjusted and appointed within a period of two months subject to verification of their documents.