CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 1 of 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 225 CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 02.09.2026 Anjana Devi ...Petitioner(s) Vs. The State of Haryana and another ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Ravi Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suneel Ranga, D.A.G., Haryana. *** NIDHI GUPTA, J. Present Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned action of the Respondent Commission for not allowing the petitioner to participate in the written test on 18.08.2024, by excluding her name/Registration Number from the list of short-listed candidates, being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the terms and conditions of the advertisement dated 28.06.2024 (Annexure P-3); And further issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to select and appoint the petitioner on Group-C post in the Govt. Department/Board/Corporation, against the vacancies reserved for ESM/DESM-General category particularly when these were not filled up due to lapses attributed on the part of Commission for not DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 2 of 8 recommending sufficient number of eligible candidates like the petitioner in response to advertisement dated 28.06.2024 (Annexure P-3). 2. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.2-Haryana Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commission’) has issued Advt.No.4/2024 dated 28.06.2024 (Annexure P-3) inviting applications for Group-C posts under different categories from amongst the candidates who had qualified the Common Eligibility Test (CET). Petitioner had qualified CET Exam in November 2022 and obtained 49.23 marks out of 95 marks as evident from the Certificate (Annexure P-2). Thus, petitioner was eligible for selection and appointment under the above said Advertisement. Petitioner being eligible, had applied under UR-DESM (Unreserved - Dependent of Ex-Serviceman) Category for the post of Inspector/Category No.96; Sub Divisional Clerk/Category No. 350; and for post of Clerk/Category No.380 under Group No. 56; Female Warden/Category No.381 under Group No.57. Petitioner being dependent of Ex-Serviceman had applied under UR-DESM as evident from her DESM Certificate dated 04.06.2019 (Annexure P-1). 3. Learned counsel submits that the respondent-Commission had then issued an Announcement dated 12.08.2024 (Annexure P-5), as per which, petitioner was shortlisted in Category No. 380/Clerk for Group No.57; wherein cut off marks for UR-DESM Category were 47.814081. However, thereafter, Commission had again published list of shortlisted candidates on 15/16.08.2024 (Annexure P-6) superseding the previous list DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 3 of 8 (Annexure P-5). However, Registration no. of the petitioner was not included in list dated 15/16.08.2024 (Annexure P-6). 4. Learned counsel submits that grievance of the petitioner is that although her registration no. was previously shortlisted however, in the list issued calling the candidates for four times the number of posts, her name has not been shortlisted. Even no proper reason had been disclosed by the Commission for excluding the name of the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel submits that from the Final List (Annexure P- 7), it is clear that number of the vacancies in Group-C in ESM/DESM- General Category have not been filled up due to non-availability of eligible candidates. It is contended that even though eligible candidates such as the petitioner were very much available with the Commission, the said vacancies reserved for ESM/DESM-General have not been filled up by the Commission. As such, petitioner deserves to be considered against the said vacancies. In this regard, petitioner had even submitted legal notice dated 19.11.2024 (Annexure P-8) calling upon the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner on Group-C post. It is contended that even as per the Instructions dated 02.05.2002 (Annexure P-9) issued by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Haryana, to all departments, respondents have been directed to decide legal notice and representations served upon it expeditiously. Yet, petitioner has received no reply to the aforesaid legal notice. 6. He accordingly prays that the present Writ Petition be allowed; and following prayers be accepted: - DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 4 of 8 “(i) Issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned action of the Respondent Commission for not allowed the petitioner to participate in the written test on 18.08.2024, by excluding her name/ Registration Number from the list of short-listed candidates, being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the terms and conditions of the advertisement dated 28.06.2024 (Annexure P-3); And (ii) Further issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to select and appoint the petitioner on Group-C post in the govt. department/Board/Corporation, against the vacancies reserved for ESM/DESM-General category particularly when these were not filled up due to lapses attributed on the part of Commission for not recommended sufficient number of eligible candidates like the petitioner in response to advertisement dated 28.06.2024 (Annexure P-3).” 7. Per contra, learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed submissions of the petitioner and has pointed out that the selection process of the aforesaid Advt.No.4/2024 already stands concluded. Whereas the present Writ Petition has been filed in the year 2025. As such, claim of the petitioner cannot be entertained at this belated stage. 8. It is further submitted that in any event, petitioner is not eligible to sit in the written examination as petitioner is over age. He accordingly prays for dismissal of the present Writ Petition. 9. No other argument has been raised on behalf of learned counsel for the parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions of the petitioner. DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 5 of 8 10. Perusal of the written statement dated 22.04.2026 shows that respondents have assigned cogent reasons for not shortlisting the petitioner in the Category in which the petitioner had applied. Relevant extract of the written statement in this regard is reproduced as under: - “4. That the reasons for not shortlisting of the petitioner for the aforementioned categories are as under:- Sr. No. Cat. No. Name of post Marks obtained in CET Phase-1 Reason for not shortlisting Remarks 1. 96 Inspec tor 49.23141 69 Only UR-DisESM candidates were shortlisted Disabled ex- servicemen candidates were firstly shortlisted as per priority list in view of instructions dated 09.03.2022 & 13.04.2022 as mentioned in clause 7.7 of the advertisement 2. 350 Sub Divisio nal Clerk 49.23146 9 Only UR-DisESM candidates were shortlisted Disabled ex- servicemen candidates were firstly shortlisted as priority list in view of instructions dated 09.03.2022 mentioned in clause 7.7 of the advertisement 3. 380 Clerk 49.23141 69 Secured lesser marks in the respective category As per announcemen t dated 14.08.2024, cut-off marks for UR-DESM category were 50.1561451. 4. 381 Femal e Warde 49.23141 69 Overage D.O.B. of the petitioner is 30.07.1985 DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 6 of 8 n and age prescribed for the cat. No. 381 was 18 years to 25 years The aforementioned table clarifies that the petitioner was not shortlisted for categories No. 96 (Inspector) & 350 (Sub Divisional Clerk) respectively, because only UR-DisESM (Unreserved-Disabled Ex-Serviceman) candidates were shortlisted for the said categories as per priority list in view of instructions dated 09.03.2022 & 13.04.2022 as mentioned in clause 7.7 of the advertisement. Furthermore, the petitioner was not shortlisted for category No. 380 (Clerk), as she has secured lesser marks than the last shortlisted candidate under UR-DESM (Unreserved-Dependent of Ex-Serviceman) category as per announcement dated 14.08.2024 and she was overage for category No. 381 (Female warden) because the D.O.B. of the petitioner is 30.07.1985 and age prescribed for the cat. No. 381 was 18 years to 25 years.” (Emphasis added) 11. No replication has been filed by the petitioner controverting or disputing the above said facts asserted by the respondent. 12. The second grievance of the petitioner is that she was not permitted to participate in the written test conducted on 18.08.2024 even though her name was not shortlisted. However, even the said contention of the petitioner is misconceived as no doubt petitioner was shortlisted vide the first Announcement dated 12.08.2024 (Annexure P-5); wherein cut off marks for UR-DESM were 47.8140181. Admittedly, the said Announcement was superseded by the subsequent Announcement dated 14.08.2024 (Annexure R-2/1); the relevant extract of which is as under: - DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 7 of 8 "Vide Announcement dated 12.08.2024, list of candidates shortlisted three times the number of advertised posts in various categories of Group 56 and 57 was published. Now, the consolidated list of four times the number of candidates (including the remaining one time the number of candidate) after addressing the grievances is published below. This list shall supersede the earlier list of candidates three times to the total number of posts which was published vide announcement dated 12.08.2024. Accordingly, the earlier list published on 12.08.2024 would become infructuous." 13. It is undisputed that as per the aforesaid Announcement dated 14.08.2024, cut off marks for UR-DESM Category were 50.1561451 for Category No. 380 (Clerk). The petitioner having secured lesser marks i.e. 49.2314169 marks, could not have been shortlisted. 14. Last but not the least, the selection pertaining to the Advt.No.4/2024 already stands concluded for which Final Result has already been declared on 17.10.2024 (Annexure P-7) and eligible candidates have already been recommended and selected. In respect of the Announcement dated 12.08.2024 and 14.08.2024 and the Final Result dated 17.10.2024, petitioner has approached this Court only on 15.01.2025. Consequentially, case of the petitioner is barred by delay and laches. 15. Keeping in view the above position, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed. DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4666-2025 (O&M) 8 of 8 16. Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 02.09.2026 (NIDHI GUPTA) Divyanshi JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No DIVYANSHI 2026.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document