CWP-23048-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 112 SANJANA YADAV STATE OF HARYANA AND CORAM: HON'BLE MR Present: Mr. Jashan Singh Sekhon for the petitioner Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Senior D Haryana. Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate with Ms. Sheena Dahiya, Advocate for respondent no.2 TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA The petition has been filed mandamus directing the respondents under BC-B (non cadre) Computer Science 02.08.2024. The direction has been sought on the ground that the petitioner inadvertently mentioned her the application creamy layer) should be ignored and her candidature should be considered in the category she belongs to, i.e., 2. Learned counsel for the Commission has produced relevant pages of the petitioner’s application form as well as class certificate dated 27.04.2012 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Decided On: SANJANA YADAV Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Mr. Jashan Singh Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate with Ms. Sheena Dahiya, Advocate for respondent no.2/HPSC. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA J.(Oral) The petition has been filed, inter alia directing the respondents to consider (non-creamy layer), for the post of Assistant Computer Science in response to advertisement . The direction has been sought on the ground that the petitioner mentioned her category as BC-B (creamy layer) the application form in question, though had attached a valid BC certificate along with it. This inadvertent mistake should be ignored and her candidature should be considered in the category , i.e., BC-B (non-creamy layer). Learned counsel for the Commission has produced relevant pages of the petitioner’s application form as well as class certificate dated 27.04.2012 attached therewith IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-23048-2025 Decided On: 12.08.2025 ...PETITIONER(s) ...RESPONDENT(s) . JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA , Advocate eputy Advocate General, Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate with inter alia, seeking a writ of consider the petitioner’s candidature for the post of Assistant Professor (College in response to advertisement 45/2024, dated . The direction has been sought on the ground that the petitioner B (creamy layer) while filling up form in question, though had attached a valid BC-B (non This inadvertent mistake on her part should be ignored and her candidature should be considered in the category Learned counsel for the Commission has produced photocopy of relevant pages of the petitioner’s application form as well as the backward therewith, which is retained on the , seeking a writ of candidature Professor (College , dated . The direction has been sought on the ground that the petitioner while filling up B (non part should be ignored and her candidature should be considered in the category photocopy of backward retained on the Aman Dua 2025.08.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-23048-2025 case file as Annexure ‘A’ filled up her category as BC BC-B (non-creamy layer) condition in the advertisement submitted in terms of 22.03.2022 and 16.07.2024 25. It was clearly mentioned He further contends that the Commission 24.02.2025, requiring the candidates, who categories in the application form with valid category cert form in response to the corrigendum held on 15.06.20 accordingly considered as a General category shortlisted for the next sta had no option 3. Heard. 4. In view of the record on behalf of the Commission has not upload belongs to the category. Her failure to respon the Commission dated compounded her problems which cannot be remedied when the closing date candidature has been considered application form submitted by her and the documents appended therewith. 2025 -2- as Annexure ‘A’. Based upon that, he contends that filled up her category as BC-B (creamy layer) creamy layer) certificate along with application form condition in the advertisement 45/2024. A valid certificate was required to be submitted in terms of the Government instructions/notification dated and 16.07.2024, respectively, it had to be . It was clearly mentioned that any old certificate would not be He further contends that the Commission also , requiring the candidates, who in the application form, to fill up a fresh application with valid category certificate. The petitioner form in response to the corrigendum also, and appeared for the Screening Test held on 15.06.2025 on the basis of her original application form. accordingly considered as a General category shortlisted for the next stage of selection on merit had no option but to consider her candidature as a General category Heard. In view of the facts apparent from the documents placed on record on behalf of the Commission, it stands not uploaded a valid BC-B category certificate belongs to the category. Her failure to respon the Commission dated 24.02.2025, to submit a fresh application form, has also compounded her problems which cannot be remedied when the closing date for submission of application has been considered under General category on the basis of application form submitted by her and the documents appended therewith. , he contends that the petitioner (creamy layer) and failed to upload a valid certificate along with application form as per the A valid certificate was required to be Government instructions/notification dated it had to be valid for the year 2024- that any old certificate would not be considered. also issued a corrigendum dated , requiring the candidates, who had wrongly mentioned their to fill up a fresh application form along . The petitioner failed to submit any application , and appeared for the Screening Test original application form. She was accordingly considered as a General category candidate and could not be e of selection on merit. Therefore, the Commission as a General category candidate. apparent from the documents placed on stands established that the petitioner B category certificate to the effect that she belongs to the category. Her failure to respond to the corrigendum issued by a fresh application form, has also compounded her problems which cannot be remedied in the present situation applications is already over. And her under General category on the basis of application form submitted by her and the documents appended therewith. the petitioner and failed to upload a valid as per the A valid certificate was required to be Government instructions/notification dated - . dated mentioned their form along submit any application , and appeared for the Screening Test e was candidate and could not be . Therefore, the Commission . apparent from the documents placed on that the petitioner she issued by a fresh application form, has also in the present situation her under General category on the basis of Aman Dua 2025.08.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-23048-2025 5. In view thereof, there is no merit in the petition and it stands dismissed in limine 12.08.2025 Ad Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether reportable? 2025 -3- In view thereof, there is no merit in the petition and it stands in limine. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether reportable? In view thereof, there is no merit in the petition and it stands TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No In view thereof, there is no merit in the petition and it stands Aman Dua 2025.08.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document