Satpal Singh vs The Commissioner on 19 May, 2009

               C.W.P. No. 1285 of 2007                         -1-

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH

                         C.W.P. No. 1285 of 2007

                         DATE OF DECISION: MAY 19, 2009


Satpal Singh
                                                        .....PETITIONER
                               Versus

The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation,
Chandigarh and others
                                                       ....RESPONDENTS


CORAM:     HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
                        ---

Present:    Mr.Sushil Jain, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            Mr.Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate,
            for respondents No.1 and 2.

            Mr.Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate,
            for respondents No.3 to 11 and 13 to 21.
                   ..

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)

The petitioner, who was one of the candidates for the posts of

Firemen, has filed the instant petition challenging the selection of Foremen

made by the respondent-Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh.

It is the case of the petitioner that while not awarding the marks

on account of additional qualifications, i.e., +2 and B.A./B.Sc., as per the

criteria laid down by the respondent-Corporation, the petitioner has been

illegally ignored for selection on the said post, whereas respondents No.3 to

21, who are less meritorious, have been selected.

In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.1 and

2, in Annexure R-1, the criteria of selection worked out by the respondent-
C.W.P. No. 1285 of 2007 -2-

Corporation for the posts of Firemen has been given. According to Clause

(b) of the said criteria, for additional educational qualifications, i.e., +2,

Fireman Course from a recognized Institute and B.A./B.Sc., five marks have

been allocated. Concededly, as mentioned in para 11 of the written

statement, the petitioner has not been given any marks on account of

additional qualifications. As per the criteria, the petitioner had secured total

63 marks.

The case of the petitioner is that he is +2 and B.A. passed, but

on that account he has not been given any marks. In the written statement, it

has been stated that along with his Application Form, the petitioner has not

annexed any certificate with regard to passing of the +2 examination. As far

as B.A. examination is concerned, the certificate annexed with the

Application Form does not show that he has cleared the said examination

because the said certificate shows the result of the petitioner as “RL

Lower”. By noticing these facts, the respondent-Corporation did not give

any marks to the petitioner on account of additional qualifications.

During the course of hearing, I have perused the original

Result-cum-Details Marks Card of BA Part-III of the petitioner, which

clearly indicates the result as “RL Lower”. It is also admitted fact that the

petitioner did not submit +2 certificate with the application. Keeping in

view these facts, the action of the respondent-Corporation in not adding the

marks for the additional qualification, seems to be justified. Learned

counsel for the respondent-Corporation further pointed out that in case the

petitioner is given five marks for the additional qualification, even then the

petitioner could not have been selected because the last selected candidate

had secured 73.5 marks. On other point, as raised in this petition, a Division
C.W.P. No. 1285 of 2007 -3-

Bench of this Court in Ravinder Kumar v. Commissioner, Municipal

Corporation, Chandigarh and another, 2008(3) SCT 240 has upheld the

selection while holding that the petitioner cannot be permitted to dispute the

selection process of holding of written test for the post of Fireman. In view

of this, there is no merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

May 19, 2009                            (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)
vkg                                             JUDGE