CWP-9470-2017 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 206 CWP-9470-2017 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.07.2026 Sunil Parkash ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Parveen Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of mandamus, directing respondent No.3 to either decide the representation dated 18.03.2017 (Annexure P-2) or in the alternative to countersign the experience certificate dated 15.03.2017 (Annexure P-1) expeditiously, so as to enable the petitioner to claim the benefit of additional marks as prescribed by the respondent/State, for his selection and appointment to the post of PGT (Hindi) pursuant to Advertisement No.4 of 2015. 2. The brief facts of the case, as pleaded in the writ petition, are that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer (Hindi) on 10.07.2006 in M.L.A. Senior Secondary School, Jatauli, District Gurugram, an aided school receiving grant-in-aid from the State of Haryana. Although MOHD YAKUB 2026.07.22 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. CWP-9470-2017 2 the services of the petitioner were terminated on 30.03.2011, he challenged the said action before this Court by filing CWP No.8314 of 2011, pursuant to which he was permitted to rejoin the services on 15.11.2014. The petitioner, thereafter, also filed CWP No.9537 of 2016 seeking redressal of his service-related grievances, which was disposed of on 16.05.2016 with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide his appeal by passing a speaking order. Alleging non-compliance thereof, the petitioner instituted COCP No.802 of 2017 and during the pendency of the said proceedings, the respondent/State issued Advertisement No.4 of 2015 inviting applications for the post of PGT (Hindi). The petitioner qualified the written examination and was called for interview on 09.04.2017. In order to claim the benefit of additional marks for teaching experience, he was required to submit a duly countersigned experience certificate. Thereafter, respondent Nos.4 and 5 issued the experience certificate dated 15.03.2017 but allegedly declined to obtain its countersignature from respondent No.3 on the ground that the petitioner had instituted various writ petitions and contempt proceedings against the respondents. The petitioner accordingly submitted a representation dated 18.03.2017 requesting respondent No.3 to countersign the experience certificate. However, no action was taken thereon, compelling him to approach this Court by way of the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that although the experience certificate had been issued by respondent Nos.4 MOHD YAKUB 2026.07.22 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. CWP-9470-2017 3 and 5, the same could not be utilized for claiming additional marks unless it was duly countersigned by respondent No.3 in terms of the applicable recruitment instructions. Respondent No.3 deliberately withheld the countersigned experience certificate solely on the ground that the petitioner had earlier instituted writ and contempt proceedings against the respondents. Despite submission of the representation dated 18.03.2017 requesting the competent authority to countersign the certificate, no action was taken, thereby depriving the petitioner of the benefit of additional marks in the ongoing recruitment process. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the experience certificate could not initially be countersigned as the particulars and information furnished by the petitioner were incomplete. He further submits that the petitioner was required to furnish the complete particulars and, upon receipt of the requisite documents and information, the needful was done by the answering respondents. Learned State counsel further contends that the experience certificate was duly countersigned and issued to the petitioner on 27.05.2017, as discernible from Annexure R-1. He further submits that while acknowledging receipt of the certificate, the petitioner had mentioned an incorrect date, whereas the certificate had in fact been issued on 27.05.2017. He, therefore, submits that the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is no longer survives as the relief sought by the petitioner had already been granted during the pendency of the proceedings, rendering the writ petition as infructuous. MOHD YAKUB 2026.07.22 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. CWP-9470-2017 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 6. Upon consideration of the matter, this Court finds that the experience certificate, in question has admittedly been countersigned and issued to the petitioner on 27.05.2017, as is evident from Annexure R-1 appended with the short reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. A perusal of the said reply further reveals that the experience certificate could not initially be countersigned as the petitioner had not furnished the complete particulars and requisite documents. 7. In view of the aforesaid factual position, it is apparent that the principal grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition already stands redressed during the pendency of the proceedings. Once the experience certificate has been countersigned and issued, the relief sought by the petitioner for issuance of direction to respondent No.3 to countersign the experience certificate or decide his representation, no longer survives for adjudication. 8. Consequently, the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of accordingly. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 22.07.2026 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2026.07.22 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.