H.R. Panwar, J. - (1.) BOTH these writ petitions involve identical questions of law and facts and, therefore, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, they are being heard and decided by a common order.
(2.) IN both these writ petitions, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to consider their case for the post of Senior Teacher according to their merit and to issue the appointment orders. The facts and circumstances giving rise to SBCWP No. 5977/2003 filed by petitioner Poornima Rani are that the petitioner claims herself to be a member of Other Backward Class having the qualification of B.A. from J.N.V. University, Jodhpur. On inviting applications by the respondents for the post of Senior Teacher vide advertisement dt. 18.08.2003, she applied for the post in question. The respondents has shown the total percentage of marks of petitioner Poornima Rani as 79% in the provisional seniority list but later on it was reduced to 74.06%. Petitioner's case is that as per the formula prescribed for preparation of merit list, the percentage of marks comes to 74.60, whereas the respondents have wrongly assigned it as 74.06%. Petitioner further claimed that the cut off marks fixed by the respondents for female OBC candidate is 74.39% whereas her percentage comes to 74.60 and as such she is entitled for consideration of her case for appointment. Hence this writ petition.
(3.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to SBCWP No.2981/2005 filed by petitioners Smt. Bhawana and Smt. Annu Singla are that petitioner Smt. Bhawana is having the qualifications of M.A., B.Ed. and petitioner Smt. Annu Singla is having the qualifications of B.A., B.Ed. Petitioner Smt. Bhawna passed B.A. examinations from Punjab University, Chandigarh with the subjects English, Punjabi and Punjabi (Optional), while petitioner Smt. Annu Singla passed her B.A. examination with English, Punjabi and Economics. The respondent No.2 invited applications for the recruitment on 101 posts of Senior Teachers in Science, Maths, English and Physical Teacher. The petitioners were called for interview on 19.08.2003 but their name was not included in the office order dt. 20.04.2005, by which the respondents provided appointments to 53 male and 16 female teacher and thereby filled up only 69 posts out of 101 posts advertised by them. Hence this writ petition.;