KARANBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition is directed against the order dated 10.08.2017 (Annexure P-5) issued from the office of the Director General (Information Technology and Telecommunication), Punjab and whereby the appointment letter issued to the petitioner dated 09.03.2017 on the post of Constable Operator has been withdrawn/cancelled.

(2.) Counsel submits that advertisement dated 14.08.2016 (Annexure P-1) was issued by the Inspector General of Police-cum-Chairmain, Recruitment Board, IT and T Wing, Punjab inviting applications for filling up a number of vacancies of Constables including 244 vacancies of Constable Operators. The last date for submission of online applications was stipulated as 05.09.2016. It is urged that the petitioner having submitted his application online was permitted to participate in the various stages of selection. Appointment letter dated 09.03.2017 (Annexure P-2) was issued in favour of the petitioner and in pursuance to which the petitioner duly joined on the post of Constable Operator. It is argued that the action of the respondent/authorities in having cancelled the appointment vide impugned order dated 10.08.2017 after a period of having served on the post for a period of almost four months would be extremely harsh.

(3.) Mr. Bal, learned counsel representing the petitioner would very fairly concede that even though the petitioner did not possess the basic essential qualifications for the post as laid down in the advertisement dated 14.08.2016 (Annexure P-1), yet there was no misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner. It is urged that the respondent/authorities ought to have verified the qualifications possessed by the petitioner at the very threshold and since the petitioner had negotiated the selection process successfully, had been issued appointment letter and has served for a period in excess of 4 months on the post, he would be vested with a right to continue. A plea of discrimination has also been raised by contending that even private respondents No.5 to 7 did not possess the essential qualifications prescribed, yet were issued appointment letters and till date, no action has been initiated against them. Action of the respondent/authorities in having singled out the present petitioner is stated to be in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.