221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-98-2023 Date of decision: 22.07.2026 Mohit Khatri ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Akshit Pathania, AAG, Haryana (through V.C.). HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned action of respondent No.2-Commission, whereby, the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Art & Craft Teacher was not considered and the respondents had failed to consider the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that the date of marks sheet i.e. 30.10.2006 is after the cut-off date i.e. the last date for submission of the application as per advertisement i.e. 21.08.2006. Further, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Art & Craft Teacher keeping in view the eligibility/certificate dated 18.03.2021 (Annexure P-8). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the respondent-Commission had advertised 816 posts of Art & Craft Teachers by inviting applications from eligible candidates. The date of publication of the NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -2- advertisement was 20.07.2006 and the last date for submission of the application forms was 21.08.2006. Pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner as well as other candidates, submitted their application forms. The respondent-Commission finalized the selection in the year 2010. The petitioner remained unsuccessful, whereas the other successful candidates joined the respondent-Department. In the meantime, the aforesaid selection was challenged before this Court in CWP No.18482 of 2010 titled as Suman Kumari Vs. State of Haryana and others and vide judgment dated 20.02.2015, the writ petition was allowed and the selection of Art & Craft Teachers was set aside. 3. In purported compliance, the posts were re-advertised again and, thereafter, 816 posts of Art & Craft Teachers were advertised, wherein it was clearly stipulated that those candidates who had applied under the earlier advertisement need not apply afresh. The petitioner had earlier applied for the post of Art & Craft Teacher and submitted his application form along with his certificates of educational qualifications i.e. the Mark Sheet of Bachelor of Fine Arts and the Mark Sheet of M.A. (Final Drawing and Painting) as discernible from Annexure P-2. After scrutiny, the petitioner was issued an admit card. The petitioner appeared in the written examination and the respondent-Commission issued a public notice dated 23.02.2021 declaring the result of the written examination, wherein, the roll number of the petitioner finds mention. The petitioner successfully qualified the written examination and secured 122 marks therein as discernible from Annexure P-4. During scrutiny of the documents, the credentials of the petitioner's qualifications were found to be in order and NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -3- the petitioner was declared eligible. The successful candidates were called for an interview vide public notice dated 10.03.2021 and the petitioner was also issued an admit card. The petitioner appeared for the interview on 14.03.2021. However, the respondent-Commission raised a general objection that the candidates who had submitted their mark sheets regarding their educational qualifications, wherein, the date mentioned on the mark sheets was after the cut-off date for submission of applications, would not be considered (Annexure P-7). Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that a notice was issued on 16.03.2021 (Annexure P-7), requiring the candidates to produce an individual certificate from the issuing authority clarifying that they had passed the requisite qualification before the cut-off date. It was further directed that the candidates should submit such certificate till the last date of hearing, failing which, they would be considered ineligible. The petitioner produced the verification issued by the concerned University dated 18.03.2021, wherein, it was clearly mentioned that the petitioner had passed his 04 years’ degree in the year 2006 and that the result was declared on 25.05.2006, whereas, the statement of marks for the same was issued on 20.10.2006. The last date for submission of the application form was 21.08.2006. As such, the petitioner had already passed the requisite Bachelor of Fine Arts degree on 25.05.2006 and was, therefore, fully eligible. The petitioner also obtained 10 marks in the interview and his total aggregate is 132 marks, which includes 122 marks in the written examination and 10 marks in the interview. The petitioner came to know that the last candidate selected in the General Category had secured 110 marks, whereas, the petitioner had secured 132 marks. He, accordingly, NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -4- approached the respondent-Commission and submitted a representation dated 27.12.2022 (Annexure P-10). The act and conduct of the respondent in not considering the petitioner eligible is contrary to the record, as the petitioner is fully eligible and entitled to be considered for the post of Art & Craft Teacher. Thereafter, the result was revised in terms of Annexure P-9 on 26.12.2022, pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 09.11.2022 in CWP No.24339 of 2021 titled as Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of Haryana and others. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgments rendered by this Court in CWP No.22827 of 2018 titled as Preeti Devi Vs. State of Haryana and another decided on 18.12.2018 and CWP No.22885 of 2021 titled as Ravinder Vs. Haryana Staff Selection Commission and another decided on 14.03.2022, wherein an identical issue was considered by this Court. This Court has held that once a candidate has passed the examination before the cut- off date, for all intents and purposes, he possesses the essential qualification prior to the cut-off date and the objection of the respondent that the detailed marks card of the degree was formally issued after the cut-off date, is liable to be rejected. Even in Ravinder's case (supra), this Court considered an identical issue and directed the respondent-Commission to consider the candidature of the petitioner therein, as he had acquired the essential qualification prior to the cut-off date by passing the examination in question, the result whereof was declared prior to the cut-off date. Further, the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.211 of 2022 titled as Jagdip Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana and others and connected cases decided on 17.11.2023, has directed the respondents to declare the result of the petitioners therein and NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -5- in case they secured more marks than those of the last selected candidate in their respective categories, offer them appointment by converting equal number of vacant posts of TGT Art to those of Art and Craft Teacher in a diminishing cadre. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel submits that the petitioner has secured 132 marks. Further, in compliance of the order dated 03.07.2023 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Review Petition No.154 of 2022 in Civil Appeal No.7031 of 2021, the result declared on 26.12.2022 (Annexure P-9) was superseded and the result already declared vide notice dated 14.11.2021 was made active for the post of Art and Craft. In the initial result dated 14.11.2021, the final cut off for general category for the post of Art and Craft is 142 marks, whereas, the present petitioner has secured 132 marks which is less than the last selected candidate against the post of Art and Craft i.e. 142 marks. Further, the result declared on 26.12.2022 (Annexure P-9), there was a clear cut off stipulation that the aforesaid revised result is subject to the outcome of the litigation pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the case with their able assistance, it transpires that the petitioner has participated in the selection process pursuant to the fresh advertisement issued in compliance of the judgment dated 20.02.2015 rendered in Suman Kumari’s case (supra). The petitioner was found eligible and he was allowed to participate in the written examination as well as in an interview. Pursuant to the public notice issued on 16.03.2021 (Annexure P-7), the petitioner has produced the certificate dated 18.03.2021 (Annexure P-8) in which it has been NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -6- categorically mentioned that the petitioner has completed his 04 years of Bachelor in Fine Arts degree in the year 2006. The result was declared on 25.05.2006 and as such, in terms of the judgments rendered by this Court in Preeti Devi’s case (supra) and Ravinder’s case (supra), the petitioner for all intents and purposes has acquired the eligibility by passing the aforesaid examination on 25.05.2006, whereas, the last date for submission of the application form was 21.08.2006. The determination of eligibility of the candidate as on the earlier advertisement No.06/2006 was preserved when the subsequent advertisement was circulated for 816 posts in terms of the judgment rendered by this Court in Suman Kumari’s case (supra). Moreover, learned State counsel is not in a position to distinguish the case of the petitioner from the case of the petitioner in Preeti Devi’s case (supra), however, his objection regarding the cut off being 142 marks, which was made active in terms of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 03.07.2023 in Review Petition No.154 of 2022 in Civil Appeal No.7031 of 2021. Further, the revised result declared on 26.12.2022 (Annexure P-9) was subject to the outcome of the litigation arising out of the final outcome of Review Petition No.154 of 2022 filed in SLP No.8670 of 2007. The stand taken by learned State counsel has already been examined by this Court in Jagdip Singh's case (supra), after noticing the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as well as the implications of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 03.07.2023, wherein, the following was observed:- “...16. In this view of the matter, this Court has no reason not to follow the view earlier taken by the Division Bench in NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -7- Sunita case, affirmed by the Supreme Court, and reiterated in Kavita Rani case. This is in line with the view earlier view taken by another Division Bench of this Court in Navneet Kaur case too. The petitioners herein acquired the essential qualification of Diploma in Art and Craft in September 2006, before the extended cut-off date of 10.12.2008, and were considered eligible. The notice dated 16.03.2021, referred to by the respondents, did not relate to the petitioners as they never claimed to have acquired qualification prior to the original cut- off date. Therefore, it cannot be said that their candidature was provisionally considered by the respondents. Instead, they were considered eligible up to the last stage and were interviewed also. The only reason for finally rejecting their candidature by not declaring the result was, acquisition of qualification of two- year Diploma in Art and Craft after the original cut-off date, 21.08.2006. It is not sustainable in the light of law laid down, as discussed hereinabove, that there cannot be two cut-offs for candidates in a selection, one for determining minimum age to apply and the other for determining the qualification. Accordingly, rejection of the petitioners' candidature becomes untenable. Availability of posts 17. It also needs to be noted that as per result of the instant selection declared for 816 advertised posts on 14.11.2021, 667 candidates, who possessed Diploma in Art and Craft through distant education mode from the Kurukshetra University, were declared ineligible as their diploma was not considered equivalent to the requisite qualification. Only 153 candidates were recommended for appointment by the Commission. This was challenged by the candidates before this Court by filing a petition, CWP No.20630 of 2006 titled Suman Lata and others v. NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -8- State of Haryana and others. The petition was allowed, holding that the petitioners had a right to be considered for the posts of Art and Craft Teachers on the basis of diploma acquired from the Kurukshetra University. Finally, the matter reached the Supreme Court, and, vide judgment dated 24.11.2021 passed in Devender Bhaskar and others v. State of Haryana and others, the judgment passed by this Court was set aside, holding that the Court erred in considering Diploma of Art and Craft acquired from the Kurukshetra University as valid. The same could not be considered equivalent to the examination of two- year Diploma in Art and Craft conducted by the Haryana Industrial Training Department. 17.1. Therefore, only 153 candidates were recommended for appointment by the Commission, vide notice dated 08.03.2022. Other candidates who could not be selected as per result dated 14.11.2021, filed various petitions, including CWP No.24339 of 2021 titled Manoj Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others, claiming selection and appointment on the posts of Art and Craft Teachers pursuant to the instant advertisement, as posts were lying vacant after 668 candidates holding diploma from the Kurukshetra University had been declared ineligible. This Court, vide order dated 09.11.2022, directed the Commission to carry out selection process on the remaining 668 posts. Pursuant thereto, the Commission notified revised final result, vide announcement dated 26.12.2022, and appointment letters were given to 178 candidates, subject to final outcome of the review petitions against the judgment in Devender Bhaskar case (supra) pending before the Supreme Court. Accordingly, total 331 candidates were appointed (153 appointed on the basis of result dated 14.11.2021 and 178 pursuant to result dated 26.12.2022). NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -9- 17.2. The candidates declared ineligible on the basis of Diploma from the Kurukshetra University had filed review petitions in Devender Bhaskar case (supra), which were clubbed with Review Petition (C) No.154 of 2022. Other candidates were also impleaded as parties to these petitions. During the course of hearing, the government accepted Diploma in Art and Craft from Kurukshetra University as an equivalent qualification to Diploma in Art and Craft secured from Haryana Industrial Training Department. Further, it was brought to the notice of the Court that as per information furnished by the Department, 4248 posts of TGT Art and Craft (Drawing) were lying vacant as on 16.02.2023, and all the applicants being eligible could be accommodated against those posts. This is so recorded in the interim order, dated 10.05.2023, passed in the review petitions, which reads as under: Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has placed before us response under the RTI Act which says that 4248 posts of TGT Art and Craft (Drawing) are lying vacant as on 16.02.2023. It is further submitted that in view of the existence of so many vacant posts, all the applicants who are eligible can be accommodated. Response of the RTI is taken on record. Learned counsel appearing for the State prays for and is allowed three days time to seek instructions in the matter. The matter be listed on 16.05.2023 to consider only the question whether the State is ready and willing to accommodate all the qualified persons on the vacant posts. NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -10- 17.3. Pursuant thereto, an additional affidavit dated 20.05.2023, was filed by the Director, Secondary Education Department, which reads as under: 3. That in compliance of the above mentioned interim order dated 10.05.2023, the matter has been referred to the Government for taking decision in the matter and the Government has decided to give permission/one time relaxation to convert 178 posts of TGT Art to the post of ART & Craft Teacher (Diminishing Cadre), so that all the review petitions and effected person having Diploma from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra (i.e. 667 candidates) who were in the first select list dated 17.11.2021 sent by HSSC can be accommodated without effecting any person who has already been appointed (including 178 candidates appointed conditionally vide order dated 09.11.2022 passed by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CWP No. 24339 of 2021). The above said decision taken by the Government not to be treated as precedent. Hence, in view of the submission made above, it is respectfully prayed before this Hon'ble Court that the present Review Application may kindly be decided in the interest of justice. 17.4. Based upon that, the review petitions were disposed of by the Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 03.07.2023, in terms of the readiness of the government to accommodate and appoint candidates having Diploma in Art and Craft from the Kurukshetra University, who were found meritorious and included in the selection list, dated 14.11.2021, without adversely affecting 178 candidates, who were conditionally NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -11- appointed pursuant to directions of the High Court. It has also been observed that such appointments have to be made against 667 notified vacant posts, and 178 appointees are to be treated distinct and separate since they have been converted as Art and Craft Teachers (diminishing cadre). It is, therefore, apparent that the respondents on their own agreed to convert 178 posts of TGT Art to the posts of Art and Craft Teachers (diminishing cadre) to give appointment to all the review petitioners before the Court. 17.5. Right of the petitioners herein to be considered for the posts of Art and Craft Teacher pursuant to the advertisement in question, has been defeated by rejection of their candidature on unfounded grounds which are not sustainable in law, as discussed in the earlier part of the judgment. This right cannot be denied to them on the plea of non-availability of posts as they are over-age for any other selection at this stage. Besides, the respondents themselves have converted vacant posts of TGT Art to posts of Art and Craft Teacher for accommodating the candidates who were not in the original selection list and were given conditional appointments. Therefore, there is no reason why the petitioners should not be considered for appointment by converting vacant posts of TGT Art, in case they find place in the selection list as per merit. 18. Accordingly, in the peculiar facts of this case, the respondents are directed to declare the result of petitioners' selection, and in case they secure more marks than those of the last selected candidate in their respective categories, offer them appointment by converting equal number of vacant posts of TGT Art to those of Art and Craft Teacher (in a diminishing cadre) NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-98-2023 -12- within a period of four weeks from receiving a certified copy of this order. xxxx xxxx xxxx” 6. The intra Court appeal bearing LPA No.1151 of 2024 preferred by the respondent-Commission against the aforesaid judgment has been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.08.2025. 7. In view of the admitted factual position and the settled position of law, the present petition is disposed of in terms of the judgments rendered by this Court in Jagdip Singh's case (supra), Preeti's case (supra) and Ravinder's case (supra). The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment and grant all notional consequential benefits from the date any candidate lower in merit than the petitioner was granted such appointment, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 22.07.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.08.01 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh