Jagbir Singh v. Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar And Another

Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.:— The petitioner was an applicant for the two posts of District Extension Specialists (Animal Science). He has not been appointed. He complains that the Respondent-University has arbitrarily appointed respondent No. 2 who was below him in order of merit.

2. The appointment of Bharat Singh has already been set aside in CWP No. 17907 of 1990, decided on September 7, 1985.

3. In view of the decision in the aforesaid writ petition, the appointment of respondent No. 2 cannot be sustained.

4. Mr. Hemant Gupta submits that since the petitioner was higher than respondent No. 2, a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-University to appoint him, should be issued. Mr. A. Mohunta, opposes this prayer.

5. Admittedly, the number of posts advertised by the University was only 2. It is also conceded that in pursuance to the selection conducted by the University, seven persons have already been appointed. This was apparently in violation of the law as declared by a Full Bench of this Court in Bijender Singh v. The State of Haryana etc., 1994 (3) PLR 1. Even their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Gujarat State Dy. Executive Engineers' Association v. The State of Gujarat, JT 1994 (3) SC 559: [1994 (1) SLR 55 (SC)] have take a similar view. In this situation, any direction for the appointment of the petitioner would be wholly illegal.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the extent that the appointment of respondent No. 2 cannot be sustained. However, the claim of the petitioner for appointment to the post is rejected. The Respondent-University is directed to re-advertise the posts. The petitioner as well as respondent No. 2 shall have a right to compete. If necessary, the University shall consider their request with regard to relaxation in age. Whosoever is considered suitable, shall be appointed. No costs.

7. Petition allowed.