M.M.KUMAR, J. - (1.) THIS petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing the selection of 2977 persons made by the respondents on the post of J.B.T. teachers. Respondent No. 2, Haryana Staff Selection Commissioner (for brevity the 'HSSC') issued an advertisement No. 7/2004 inviting applications for 2977 posts of J.B.T. teachers for various districts in Haryana except Rohtak, Sonepat and Jhajjar. Out of the total number of posts, 1461 posts were set apart for the general category. We are concerned with the general category in the instant petition. The last date of receipt of applications was 7.10.2004. The respondents have laid down the criterion for selection, which reads as under : "1. Basic qualification 15 marks Matric +2 0.15 of the percentage of marks in which ever higher marks have been obtained. 2. Essential qualification : 30 marks Diploma in Education or its equivalent recognized by the Haryana Govt. 0.30 of the percentage of marks 3. Higher qualification : 05 marks i) Ph.D. ii) M.Phil iii) Post Graduation iv) Graduation Note : The candidates will be given marks only under one clause whichever is more beneficial to him/her. 4. Viva voce 25 marks (To assess the knowledge of the subject,, communication skill,, general knowledge,, general awareness and intelligence) Note : - I mark as Pref. Marks for experience to Project teachers, in addition to the above criteria."
(2.) ON the basis of the interviews held from October, 2004 to December, 2004, HSSC declared the result on 16.12.2004. The last candidate in the general category had secured 47.03 marks whereas the petitioner has secured 44.97 marks. It is thus evident that the petitioner could not make the grade and her name did not figure even in the waiting list. It is claimed that the petitioner possess higher merit than those who have been selected.
(3.) IN response to notice of motion, the respondents have filed reply wherein broad facts have been admitted with the further remarks that the last candidate belonging to general category had secured 47.03 marks whereas the petitioner had secured 44.97 marks. The break up of marks as awarded to the petitioner, according to the criterion, has also been disclosed in para 7 and the same are reflected below for facility of reference : Sr. No. Qualification of the petitioner Marks obtained in academic qualification Marks awarded as per criterion 1. Matric 360 -500 10.80 2. 10+2 326 -500 0.00 Note : As per criteria the higher marks in Matric or 10+2 are to be taken into account. Therefore, the marks of Matric have been taken into account and under the heading 10+2, zero mark has been indicated. 3. Diploma in JBT 1853 -2300 24.17 4. B.A. 1335 -2400 2.00 - Academic qualification marks 36.97 5. Viva vice 8.00 Marks 44.97 Mr. Anand Sarup, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner who was working with Chandigarh Administration has acquired valuable experience since 19.9.2000 and no marks have been awarded for that experience whereas one mark as preference marks for experience has been awarded to Project Teacher. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has excellent academic record and marks awarded to her in the interview are on lower side as she has been awarded only 8 marks out of 25 marks.;