Sandeep Kumar vs State Of Haryana & Ors.

Nidhi Gupta, J.

Present Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash impugned non-speaking order/communication (Annexure P-10) dt. 02.04.2021 issued by respondent no.2 in pursuance of Advertisement No. 07/2015 (Cat. No.13) thereby wrongly and unlawfully rejecting/ignoring the claim of petitioner for sending him for Patwar Training Course; and a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent-Department to allow the petitioner to undergo the Patwar Training Course in pursuance of Advertisement No. 07/2015 as after the recommendation of his name by the Commission he has already joined as Patwari land records with respondent-department on 05.09.2017 and to allow the consequential benefits thereupon.

It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that Advt.No.07/2015 dated 10.07.2015 (Annexure P-1) was published by the respondent No.3-Haryana Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘HSSC’) for direct recruitment against 579 posts of Patwari (Cat. No.13). Being eligible, petitioner had duly applied for the same vide application dated 12.04.2016 (Annexure P-3). On 01.05.2016, petitioner had appeared for the written examination; of which result was declared on 11.04.2017 (Annexure P-4). Document verification was held from 27.04.2017 to 29.04.2017. Vide Announcement dated 20.05.2017 (Annexure P-5), candidates who were found eligible, including the petitioner were called for interview scheduled between 24.05.2017 to 25.05.2017. Final result dated 22.07.2017 (Annexure P-6) was declared in which petitioner was selected in General Category.

It is submitted that thereafter, the petitioner had approached the respondent-Department and after all formalities, petitioner was allowed to join provisionally vide letter dated 05.09.2017 (Annexure P-7). It is submitted that in the said letter regarding provisional joining it was mentioned that all persons for the said post are to complete one year training in Patwar Training School and six months field training. It was also mentioned that regular appointment is to be given after completion of departmental test, and it was further mentioned that regarding the Patwar Training School and place he would be informed later on.

Learned counsel submits that though it was clearly mentioned in the letter of joining dated 5.9.2017, that petitioner would be informed later on regarding the Patwar Training School however, the petitioner never received any communication neither from respondent No.2, nor from respondent No.3. After waiting for three months after provisional joining, petitioner joined as Sub-Inspector in CISF on 12.01.2018 and completed his one-year training in Hyderabad upto 07.01.2019 and thereafter he was given regular posting in West Bengal and upto now he is posted there.

It is further submitted that petitioner was of the view that he would get communication from the respondent-department in regard to attend the Patwar Training School and continuously he enquired this fact from his family and also informed the postman in that regard that he is likely to receive a communication related to his post of Patwari Land Records but when he never received any such communication then he asked his relative to enquire in this regard from the department, he was told that the posts have been filled up from waiting list. But when petitioner approached personally before the respondent-department and made enquiry as to how all this has happened as he has never received any communication in this regard then he was entrusted one press note dated 14.3.2019 (Annexure P-8) from respondent-department. It is submitted that the petitioner was shocked that in the press-note it was mentioned that 3 times registered notice was sent to the selected candidates whereas, even a single such notice has not been sent to the petitioner.

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner had given an application dated 04.03.2021 (Annexure P-9) for his joining and in the said application, it is clearly mentioned that no information has ever been given to the petitioner after letter dated 05.09.2017; whereby petitioner had joined provisionally with the respondent-Department and he was to be sent in Patwar Training School but he never received any communication in that regard thereafter.

However, without appreciating the above fact petitioner had received impugned Communication dated 02.04.2021 (Annexure P-10) informing him that his application had been closed after consideration as per Memo No. HSSC/Confd/recommend/2017/705.

Learned counsel contends that after the provisional joining on the above said post against advertisement No. 07/2015 in category No.13, the petitioner has acquired a vested interest under the applicable Civil Service Rules and concerned rules of the department as per which service of the petitioner is to be dealt with.

It is reiterated that after the provisional joining of the petitioner, vide Annexure P-7, Dt. 05.09.2017 the petitioner has never been informed to attend the Patwar Training School so this is not the fault of petitioner as after waiting sufficient time on his joining he has joined on the post of Sub-Inspector in CISF and thereafter he was getting his training of one year and thereafter he was posted in West Bengal and even in the meantime he remained enquiring from his family regarding any communication from respondent-department regarding his training in Patwar Training School which was never received neither by petitioner in anyway nor by his any family member and even he enquired from the postman in this regard but he also informed with negative response and actually no communication has been sent by respondent department after provisional joining of the petitioner and the fact in the press note by respondent - department that three registered notice have been given to the selected candidates is totally false qua petitioner as he has never been given any such type of notice and moreover once the petitioner has joined provisionally then he has acquired a vested interest and that interest cannot be taken away by the department in a casual way by issuing general notice in the newspaper and that too by mentioning wrong facts as at least there should have been a personal communication with petitioner as to how he is not attending the said training school and whether or not he has any knowledge of commencement of the said training but no said exercise has been done by the respondent department what to say of services rules as per which the petitioner is to be dealt with once he has joined.

It is submitted that therefore, petitioner being more meritorious candidate and in view of the fact that he has already joined on 05.09.2017, petitioner cannot be denied appointment by passing non-speaking impugned order dated 02.04.2021 (Annexure P-10). It is argued that respondent-Department had wrongly ignored the justifiable right of the petitioner as his post is lying vacant because no candidate from Merit List has been allowed to join against the post of the petitioner on which he has already joined on 05.09.2017.

He accordingly prays that the present Writ Petition be allowed; and impugned non-speaking order dated 02.04.2021 (Annexure P-1) be set aside, and a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondent-Department to allow the petitioner to undergo Patwar Training Course in pursuance to Advt.No.7/2015 in view of the fact that after recommendation of his name by the Commission, petitioner has already joined as Patwar with the respondent-Department on 05.09.2017; and to allow consequential benefits thereupon.

Per contra, learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed submissions of the petitioner and pointed out that letter dated 05.09.2017 (Annexure P-7) was merely a provisional letter of appointment. It is submitted that thereafter, petitioner was required to report to the Directorate however, petitioner failed to do so. It is pointed out that numerous communications were also sent to the petitioner, but no reply was received from the petitioner. Vide Press Note dated 14.03.2019 (Annexure P-8), petitioner and other similar candidates were again informed to appear however, to no avail. Consequentially, candidature of the petitioner was cancelled. He accordingly prays that there is no merit to the present Writ Petition and the same be dismissed.

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.

Sequence of events has already been noticed herein above. It is the contention of the petitioner that he had submitted his joining vide letter dated 05.09.2017 (Annexure P-7). The said contention is absolutely incorrect. Perusal of the said letter shows that the same is a provisional Letter of Appointment; whereby following conditions are clearly mentioned:

A bare reading of the above shows that as per the said letter, petitioner was categorically directed to mark his presence in the Directorate office within next two days. Admittedly, petitioner has not done so. No reasons are forthcoming as to why the petitioner did not mark his presence.

Further in para 9 of the present Writ Petition, petitioner has himself admitted that he had received a text message on his registered Mobile No. and he was called for documents verification and provisional joining, pursuant to which he had approached respondent-Department and he was allowed to join provisionally “and on the spot he was given a letter in this regard, a copy of that document is being annexed herewith as Anexure P-7, Dt. 05.09.2017.” Thus, on 05.09.2017 itself, petitioner had been informed that he is required to report to the Directorate office within 2 days thereafter. However, petitioner did not do so. In fact, petitioner remained silent for 3.5 years and has emerged only in the year 2021.

The record further reveals that respondent-Department had informed the petitioner for presenting his Joining Report in the Patwar Training School, Hissar vide registered letter dated 11.01.2018 (Annexure R-1); in respect of which registered post No. is Annexure R.2. Again on 17.01.2018, Department of Revenue & Disaster Management had published list of Patwar Training Schools allotted to under training Patwaris, on its official website, which list is still available on the website. Yet, petitioner failed to report to the allotted Patwar Training School at Hissar.

Thereafter, respondents had even issued a Press Note dated 14.03.2019 (Annexure P-8) which reads as follows: -

Yet, the petitioner had not contacted the Directorate Office, Land Records Haryana. Needless to say, it is not for the respondents to keep chasing the petitioner. Rather, instead of reporting to the Directorate Office, petitioner had joined as Sub Inspector in the CISF on 12.01.2018 i.e. barely 3 months after his alleged date of joining on 05.09.2017.

It is also to be noted that 3 and 1/2 years after the date of issuance of Provisional Letter, petitioner had sent letter dated 04.03.2021 (Annexure P-9) stating that he now wants to join the post of Patwari in Land Records. No reason is given for the intervening silence. In the said letter (Annexure P-9), petitioner had also made no mention of the mandatory requirement of passing training course at the Patwar Training School. Moreover, Case of the petitioner is clearly barred by delay and laches.

The issue of delay stands settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Arvind Kumar Srivastava (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 627984, holding as under: -

The aforesaid judgment has been followed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Sudhir Bala v. State of Punjab, (Punjab And Haryana): Law Finder Doc Id # 2678248, decided on 11.12.2024; wherein it is held that “Delay and laches in filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can disentitle a petitioner to relief, especially when there is an inordinate and unexplained delay in asserting one's rights.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to controvert or dispute the above said facts and findings.

Keeping in view the above factual and legal position, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed.

Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of.