MAHESH GROVER - (1.) THE petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the revised empanelment of the successful candidates declared on 24.1.2011 (Annexure P-7) and that to issue a letter of intent in favour of the petitioner.
(2.) THE facts of the case are that in December 2007, the respondents No.1 to 4 issued a notice for appointment of LPG distributors for various places in the State of Punjab and Union Territory of Chandigarh. THE petitioner applied and furnished the requisite information as per requirement for the declared locations of Batala, district Gurdaspur in open category. She was placed at No.1 on 28.10.2009. According to the marks displayed, the petitioner had obtained 95.3 marks out of 100. This empanelment was subject to the process of verification, and as per the norms if a person placed at Sr.No.1 was found ineligible upon verification, the letter of intent would be issued to the next in merit subject of course to his eligibility as well. However, despite the fact that the petitioner was placed at No.1, the letter of intent was not issued to her and the petitioner then served a legal notice upon the respondents on 24.1.2011 and in response to this the petitioner received a letter dated 24.1.2011 intimating her that a complaint had been received by the official respondents from respondent No.6 which was looked into and was found to be correct as a result of which the marks had to be revaluated and in that process respondent No.6 obtained higher marks and the petitioner's name was thereafter pushed down appropriately in the merit list. It is with this grievance that the petitioner has filed the instant petition and has stated that no show cause notice was issued to her before and adverse order to her was passed; she was never associated with the process of reverification/reallocation of marks; the marks have been wrongly awarded to respondent No.6 by taking into consideration the material which was not appended to the application as per the requirement and the income of the wife of respondent No.6 was wrongly included while determining his eligibility and financial status as this return had been filed subsequent to the applications having been submitted and beyond the last date for consideration.
(3.) THE aforesaid being the grievance the contentions have been raised on the said lines with reference to the marking criteria and the requirement of submitting documents. Clauses 11 and 19(h) of the notice which prescribes the grant of marks as also the submission of documents on the date of applications are extracted here below for ready reference :- "11. Selection Process and Evaluation criteria. THE LPG distributor will be selected on the basis of evaluation of all eligible applicants on the following parameters. a) Capability to provide infrastructure 35 marks b) Capability to provide finance 35 marks (c) Educational qualifications 15 marks (d) age 4 marks (e) Experience 4 marks (f) Business ability/acumen 5 marks (g) Personality 2 marks Total : 150 marks THE parameter 'a' to 'd' above are document based and will be done on the basis of information given in the application. THE evaluation on the parameter C.W.P.No.20974 of 2011 -4- 'e' to 'g' will be done based on the interview. On verification if it is found that the information given in application is incorrect/false/misrepresented then the applicant's candidature will stand cancelled and will not be eligible for distributorship. xx xx xx xx 19. GENERAL (a) to (g) xx xx xx (h) Applicants should provide only that information against various items of application,for which they are in possession of supporting documents in original as on the date of submission of application. Failure to present these documents in original will result in cancellation of selection due to submission of false/unsupported informally in documents.";