Daya Chaudhary, J. - (1.) THE present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari directing the respondents to consider the petitioner at the time of interview to the post of Sanitary Inspectors. The main argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was having 69% marks in Sanitary Diploma but while shortlisting, the requirement was of 70% and hence, the petitioner was not called for interview.
(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is of shortlisting the criteria. The selection on the post of Sanitary Inspector was subject matter of dispute in CWP No. 16724 of 2011 titled as Sunita Devi and others v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission and another, decided on 11.03.2014 which was allowed with the following directions: - - On perusal of original record of the selection, it is clear that more marks have been awarded to the selected candidates. All of them have been awarded marks between the range of 17 to 20, whereas, the petitioners have been awarded lowest marks so that they may not reach the stage of selection. Such a criteria of awarding marks raises suspicion and a question mark towards the attitude of the Members of the Selection Committee. More marks have been given to the selected candidates and lowest marks have been given to the petitioners and other candidates with a purpose so that they may not reach to the stage of selection. The criteria of selection has been prepared with a pre -determined purpose to select certain candidates by awarding marks in a particular range of selection and to give marks to other candidates so that they may not reach to that range of selection. By considering the wisdom of Selection Committee that in case, the selected candidates did well in interview and marks were awarded as per their performance, the marks of interview are not being disturbed as the Court cannot close its eyes by seeing the record of selection and attitude of the Selection Committee. In view of the facts as mentioned above, the present petition is allowed and the selection is quashed with the following directions to the respondent -Commission: - - (a) 25 marks for viva voce are maintained and the same should not be disturbed. (b) 75 marks be considered for eligibility qualification by applying uniformly to all short listed candidates and to assess their merit by considering the requisite qualification as well as higher qualification and experience. (c) The Commission shall re -frame the criteria within 75 marks, reserved for eligibility qualification, giving adequate weightage to the higher qualification (d) All the candidates shall be re -assessed by the Commission in accordance with re -framed criteria, for determining their merit and suitability within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. The selection process has already been set aside and the shortlisting process has not been disturbed in the decision of said writ petition.
(3.) KEEPING in view the decision in CWP No. 16724 of 2011 decided on 11.03.2014, no ground is made out to interfere in the shortlisting process. The petition is accordingly dismissed.;