Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
  • ftr-facebook
  • ftr-instagram
  • ftr-instagram
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Punjab and Haryana High Court quashes socio-economic criteria in recruitment process

Sets aside 20 bonus marks on basis of descent, state domicile
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, May 31

Advertisement

More than a year after the Punjab and Haryana High Court asserted that confining the benefit of socio-economic criteria and awarding 20 marks on the basis of descent or Haryana domicile in recruitment process was violative of the Constitution, a Division Bench today quashed it.

Violative of Constitution

… we prima facie agree with the contentions of the petitioner that confining of the benefit of socio-economic criteria and awarding 20 marks on the basis of descent or domicile in the State of Haryana is violative of Article 16 (2) of the Constitution.

HC Division Bench

Taking up a bunch of petitions, Justices Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Sudeepti Sharma set aside bonus marks granted on the basis of socio-economic criteria after holding that it was violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution.

Advertisement

The Bench further directed the preparation of a fresh merit list solely on the basis of the marks obtained in the common eligibility test (CET) for Group C and D posts. In one of the petitions, the court had earlier suspended a clause in assistant engineers’ recruitment advertisement dealing with “socio-economic criteria and experience” and providing 20 marks on the basis of descent or to Haryana domicile applicants.

“Having regard to the principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in cases cited by the counsel for the petitioner, we prima facie agree with the contentions of the petitioner that confining of the benefit of socio-economic criteria and awarding 20 marks on the basis of descent or domicile in the State of Haryana is violative of Article 16(2) of the Constitution,” the Bench had asserted.

The petition was filed against Haryana and other respondents by Arpit Gahlawat through counsel Sarthak Gupta. Among other things, he was seeking the quashing of advertisement dated December 20, 2022, for filling up posts of assistant engineer (electrical cadre) in the electrical discipline.

Directions were also sought for quashing a regulation of DHBVNL Service of Engineers (Electrical) Regulations, 2020, and other similar amendments to the extent that 20 of 100 marks had been earmarked for the “socio-economic criteria and experience” by making it dependent on descent or Haryana domicile. BJP spokesperson Jawahar Yadav clarified that no employee would be expelled after the judgment. The Opposition was spreading lies, he added.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper