Subhash Chand vs State of Haryana and Others

M.M. Kumar, J.—Note-2 of the advertisement, dated 20.7.2006 (P-5), for appointment to the post of Lecturer School Cadre, has been challenged in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. According to Note-2, 50% posts have been reserved in favour of those candidates who have passed their matriculation from a school situated in rural area. The petitioner claims that he is a person belonging to rural area but on account of the fact that there was no school in the village he has to study in a school in the urban area for his matriculation. No argument has been advanced to show us as to how this clause offends Article 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution. The petitioner is eligible to be considered for the remaining 50% of the posts under other category. Even otherwise, we find that no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner as he is entitled to be considered for appointment for the post of Lecturer School Cadre. Despite the fact that we had adjourned the case on 22.8.2006 to enable the learned Counsel to prepare the arguments on the aforementioned issue, no argument has been advanced to show that the alleged offending Note-2 goes against any of the fundamental rights of the petitioner. Dismissed.