13 March 2008
Supreme Court
Download

R.K. PORIA Vs STATE OF HARYANA

Case number: W.P.(C) No.-000444-000444 / 2002
Diary number: 14512 / 2002
Advocates: D. MAHESH BABU Vs T. V. GEORGE


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

CASE NO.: Writ Petition (civil)  444 of 2002

PETITIONER: R.K. Poria

RESPONDENT: State of Haryana & Anr

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/03/2008

BENCH: A.K.MATHUR & LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT

O R D E R WRIT PETITION (C)NO. 444 OF 2002

1.      Applications for intervention/impleadment are dismissed. 2.      We have heard learned counsel for the parties at great length. 3.      The grievance of the petitioner was for appointment in Haryana Civil Service  (Executive Branch) against vacancy which arose in the year 1992 and selection process  whereof was completed in the year 1996 is highly belated.   4.      The brief facts are that the Haryana Public Service Commission issued an  advertisement in November, 1992 inviting applications for 12 vacancies (9 for General  and 3 for Scheduled Caste) for Haryana Civil Service (Executive Branch).  The result of  final selection was declared on 15th March, 1996.  The petitioner did not come in merit  for appointment on the post of Haryana Civil Service (Executive Branch) but he was  selected  in the Haryana Civil Service (Allied Services) and his name was recommended  for post of ’A’ Class Tehsildar.   5.      The petitioner did not make any grievance against the selection process.   However, after the judgment of this Court in Civil Appeal No. 7422/1999 titled "Sandeep  Singh Vs. State of Haryana & Anr." decided on November 09, 2000, the petitioner raised  a grievance and started making representations that he may be appointed on the 4th  vacancy because as per the roaster point every fourth vacancy was earmarked for a  candidate from the  Scheduled Caste category.  Various representations of the petitioner  did not find favour with the authorities and hence the petitioner approached this Court  by way of present writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. 6.      In our view, the grievance of the petitioner is highly belated and at this distance  of time, we do not think it proper to disturb the selection process which was completed in  the year 1996.  Accordingly, we dismiss this writ petition.  No order as to costs.