Full Judgment
IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21692 of 2013 Date of decision: 04.10.2013 Pardeep Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr.Sunil Nehra, Sr.DAG, Haryana ***** 1.
To be referred to the Reporters or not?.
2.
Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.
(Oral) Mr.Sunil Nehra, learned Sr.DAG, Haryana, on instructions from Mr.Sukhpal, Assistant Office of General Manager, Haryana Rodaways, Kaithal, who is present in Court today, submits that the petitioner passed 3 of the tests but did not qualify the road test.
Mr.Nehra has produced the result sheet in Xerox copy from Serial No.17 to 24.
The petitioner is at serial No.17.
The remarks are that he has passed the DUG test, Zig-Zag (forward/reverse) test and 8 Shape test but has not passed the road test.
The result sheet dated 7.6.2013 is taken on record as mark ‘A’.
Pursuant to the order dated 23.8.2013 in the writ petition earlier filed by the petitioner (CWP No.18534 of 2013).this Court had directed the Kumar Paritosh respondents to consider and decide the representation (P-5) within a period 2013.10.10 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.21692 of 2013 2 of 7 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.
It was directed that in case, it is found that the road test has been successfully carried, then the petitioner may be called for interview, failing which, reasons be disclosed for non-calling/selection of the petitioner.
In response to that order, the petitioner was informed that he may visit the office of the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Kaithal to watch the Compact Disc of videography recorded on the road driving test.
The petitioner has admitted in para.
10 of the writ petition that he appeared in the office of General Manager, Kaithal and was shown the videography but still insisted, that he had successfully passed the road test.
The statement in the writ petition that he was verbally told by the official of the 3rd respondents that he had qualified the test is not worthy of belief.
Nothing remains further to be decided in this matter and the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner that an independent agency be deputed to check up these facts is rejected as not tenable in direct recruitment involving thousands of contestants for the posts of Drivers in Haryana Roadways.
The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) October 04, 2013 JUDGE Paritosh Kumar Kumar Paritosh 2013.10.10 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document