Ravinder vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 20 November, 2009

CWP No.7832 of 2009                                           1



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH



                                    CWP No.7832 of 2009
                                    Date of Decision: 20.11.2009



Ravinder                                               ...Petitioner

                          Vs.

State of Haryana & Anr.                                ..Respondents




Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod K.Sharma



Present:    Mr.G.P.Singh, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            Mr.Rajiv Kawatra, Sr.DAG, Haryana,
            for the respondents.

                          ---

Vinod K.Sharma,J. (Oral)

The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this court under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to the

respondents to consider the petitioner eligible for the post of Assistant

Lineman advertised vide Advertisement No.13/2007 by the Haryana Staff

Selection Commission (respondent No.2).

Respondent No.2 advertised 151 vacancies of Assistant

Linemen. The qualification prescribed for the post was Matric with two

years ITI Certificate in Electrician/Wiremen Trade or two years vocational
CWP No.7832 of 2009 2

course under the trade of Lineman conducted by Director, ITI and

Vocational Education Haryana.

The Department did not find the petitioner eligible as he had

done his course of electrician from the Board of School Education Haryana,

whereas as per the advertisement only course undertaken under the

Director ITI, Vocational Education was recognized.

This action of the respondent was challenged on the ground

that the course undertaken by the petitioner was basically a course of an

electrician, and it is only due to different numenclature that he was not

being considered eligible otherwise for all intents and purposes the

qualification of the petitioner was equivalent to the one advertised for the

post.

It is stand of the petitioner that the Department of Industrial

Training and Vocational Education has also changed the nomenclature of

this course and now termed it as electrician MREDA, which also does not

co-relate with the one advertised.

It is also the stand of the petitioner that the Government of

Haryana vide letter dated 15.5.2008 had equated the course undertaken by

the petitioner with other identical courses run by ITI.

On notice written statement was filed by respondent No.2. The

claim of the petitioner was contested in the written statement, however, the

learned Senior Deputy Advocate General Haryana on instructions from

Balwan Singh, Assistant, Legal Cell, Haryana Staff Selection Commission

states that the persons holding qualification as that of the petitioner have
CWP No.7832 of 2009 3

already been held to be eligible to compete for the post of Assistant

Lineman, and have been issued Roll numbers. Positive stand is also taken

that the petitioner shall also be issued Roll number to compete for this post.

In view of the stand of the respondents, this petition has been

rendered infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

                                                   (Vinod K.Sharma)
20.11.2009                                              Judge
rp