M.M. Kumar, J. - (1.) THE instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment dated 16.3.2011 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the Appellant is not entitled to appear in the PCS (Executive Branch) Examination and accordingly her petition was dismissed.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the Petitioner is an employee of Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh. She has been working as Jr. Lab. Technician since 1995. An advertisement (P.1) was issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission (for brevity 'the Commission') in the press inviting applications for appointment to PCS (Executive Branch) and the last date for receipt of applications was 28.12.2009. As per Clause IV of the advertisement the age limit fixed for the candidates was 21 years to 35 years with relaxation for upper age limit for reserved categories as per government instructions and in respect of Punjab Government employees the upper age limit was relaxable upto 45 years provided they have rendered not less than 4 years continuous service under the Government. The Petitioner was more than 35 years of age when she applied in response to the advertisement appearing in the press. She alongwith others filed CWP No. 20572 of 1999 titled as Ramnik Kaushal and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. wherein this Court directed the Respondents to consider the application filed by all such persons including the Appellant and keep them in a separate group. Interim order dated 24.11.2009 passed in CWP No. 20572 of 2009 reads as under: Present: Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate for the Petitioners. Notice of motion. On our asking Ms. Madhu Dayal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accept notice and prays for time to file counter affidavit. Counter affidavit be filed within 2 weeks from today. Response to counter affidavit, if any, be filed within 2 weeks thereafter. List again on 28.1.2010. In the meantime, it will be open to the Petitioners to file their applications which would not be returned but kept separately subject to the order which may be passed in the instant writ petition. Sd/ - Chief Justice Sd/ - Judge24.12.2009 In pursuance of the interim directions issued by the Division Bench, the Appellant submitted her application on a standard proforma complete in all respects alongwith requisite documents and fee. Eventually the writ petition was dismissed on 22.4.2010 (P.3). It is appropriate to mention that the government took a decision on 9.11.2009 to relax the upper age for employees working with the Punjab Government or other State Government or Government of India upto the age of 45 years. The decision was conveyed to the Commission vide letter dated 12.11.2009. Accordingly, the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.5.2010 allowed the writ petition holding that the Central Government employees would also be covered. Subsequently some other candidates who were also aspiring for seeking appointment to PCS (Executive Branch) filed CWP No. 19389 of 2009 titled as Gur Jai Pal Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors. This Court vide order dated 25.5.2010 held that upper age limit of government employees is 45 years instead of 35 years. As a sequel to the directions issued by this Court, the Commission published a corrigendum on 22.6.2010 (P.5) and amended Clause 3(iii). Accordingly Respondents called upon all those eligible government employees who did not apply earlier to submit their application form. Clause 5 of the corrigendum (P5) reads as under: 5. In view of the above, all those now eligible government employees who could not apply earlier may submit their applications on or before 14.7.2010 by 5.00 PM.
(3.) THE Appellant represented to the Respondents on 8.7.2010 for consideration of her application which had already been submitted as it was understood by the Appellant that no fresh application was required to be submitted . However, the application earlier submitted by the Appellant to the Commission -Respondent was not considered and her candidature was rejected. It was at that stage that the Appellant filed CWP No. 18346 of 2010 which is relatable to the instant Letters Patent Appeal. While issuing notice of motion on 8.8.2010, this Court directed the Commission -Respondent to consider the candidature of the Appellant and permit her to compete for the post. However, her result was not to be declared which was subject to the final order to be passed by this Court. The aforesaid direction reads thus: Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the candidature of the Petitioner for competing for Punjab State Civil Services Combined Competitive Examination, 2009 has been rejected on the ground that the Petitioner had earlier approached this Court. However, the Court had not given any relief to the Petitioner. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that in the context in which the claim of the Petitioner was rejected by this Court, a Corrigendum has been issued by the Respondents subsequent to the date of the judgment viz. on 22.6.2010. Under the circumstances, the Petitioner cannot be held to be ineligible to compete. Notice of motion for 16.11.2010. In the meantime, the Respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the Petitioner and allow her to compete for the post. The result in regard to the Petitioner would not be declared. It is made clear that this only an interim arrangement. The matter be listed before Registrar Judicial( Bench III) for competition of service and pleadings. Copy of the order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Reader. 8.10.2010 Sd/ - Judge;