Monika vs. The State Of Haryana

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).3263/2023

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-01-2023 in LPA No.1928/2019 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh)

TARSEM SHARMA & ORS.

Petitioner(s)

Respondent $(s)$

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

(IA No. 5109/2024 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No.28169/2023 FILING IMPUGNED EXEMPTION FROM $C/C$ $\mathsf{OF}$ THE JUDGMENT, $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ INTERVENTION APPLICATION, No.64081/2023 $\mathcal{L}^{\mathcal{L}}$ IA No. 5667/2024 <pre>INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT,</pre> $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ No.216547/2023 $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, No. 94713/2023 $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ No.66474/2023 <pre>INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT,</pre> INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 178968/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 43057/2023 - VACATING STAY)

WITH

Diary $No(s).9800/2023$ (IV-B)

(IA No. 231025/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 88131/2023 - $OF$ DELAY CONDONATION $\texttt{IN}$ REFILING/CURING THE DEFECTS, $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ No.88134/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..))

$SLP(C)$ No. 9450/2023 (IV-B) $(IA)$ No. 86549/2023 PERMISSION $\mathsf{T}\mathsf{O}$ FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Diary No(s).20053/2023 (IV-B) (IA No. 111545/2023 $\mathcal{L} \subset \mathcal{L}$ CONDONATION $\mathsf{OF}$ DELAY $IN$ FILING, $TA$ No.111547/2023 - DELETING THE NAME OF PETITIONER/RESPONDENT. $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ No.111544/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..))

SLP(C) No.19303/2023 (IV-B) $(IA)$ No.163473/2023-CONDONATION $OF$ DELAY $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{N}$ FILING and $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ No.163477/2023-ADDITION/DELETION/MODIFICATION PARTIES $\quad\text{and}\quad$ $TA$ No.163475/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.163470/2023-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..))

Some Proof ted as a specific state of the sematters were called on for hearing today. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT $\frac{31}{3}$ CSRAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA

COURT NO.4

For Petitioner(s)	Dr.<br>Nirmal Chopra, AOR
	Mr. V.K. Yadav, Adv.<br>Mr. B. K. Pal, AOR
	Mr. Pardeep Gupta, Adv.<br>Mr. Parinav Gupta, Adv.<br>Mrs. Mansi Gupta, Adv.<br>Mr. Rakshit Rathi, Adv.<br>Mrs. Shashi Verma, Adv.<br>Dr. Mrs. Vipin Gupta, AOR
	Mr. Paramjit Singh Patwalia, Sr. Adv.<br>Mr. Gauravjeet Singh Patwalia, Adv.<br>Mr. Amit Verma, AOR<br>Ms. Swati Sood, Adv.
For Respondent(s)	Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv.<br>Mr. Jasbir Singh Malik, Adv.<br>Ms. Chandni Sharma, Adv.<br>Mr. Varun Punia, AOR
	Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. A.A.G.<br>Mr. Alok Sangwan, Sr. A.A.G.<br>Mr. Sumit Kumar Sharma, Adv.<br>Mr. Rajat Sangwan, Adv.<br>Ms. Himanshi Shakya, Adv.<br>Mr. Vishnu Tallapragada, Adv.<br>Mr. Vaibhav Yadav, Adv.<br>Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
	Mr. Shalender Mohan, Adv.<br>Mr. Manoj Makker, Adv.<br>Mr. Shafik Ahmed, Adv.<br>Mr. Padhmanabha Raja K.R., Adv.<br>Mr. Danish Saifi, Adv.<br>Ms. Anju, Adv.<br>Mr. Bibhav Kumar Singh, Adv.<br>Mr. Satya Prakash Gautam, Adv.<br>Mr. V. Elanchezhiyan, AOR
	Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv.<br>Mr. Jasbir Singh Malik, Adv.<br>Ms. Chandni Sharma, Adv.<br>Mr. Varun Punia, AOR
	Mr. Jitesh Malik, Adv.<br>Ms. Beena, Adv.<br>Mr. Chander Kiran, Adv.<br>Mr. Rahul Govil, Adv.<br>Mr. Varun Shobhit, Adv.<br>Mr. Raj Singh, Adv.

Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satish Kumar, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

1. We have perused the affidavit of the Director Secondary Education, Haryana Panchkula dated 18.03.2024, filed in purported compliance of order dated 12.02.2024. As of now, we do dot express any opinion with regard to the legality or propriety of appointment of 48 candidates having M.A. B.Ed. qualification over and above the 516 candidates of that category to whom appointments were offered earlier. However, it is is pointed out in the affidavit that 47 candidates out of total 607 candidates recommended by the Commission, have failed to join despite reminders sent to them.

2. In this view of the matter and in conformity with paragraph 4 of our order dated 12.02.2024, it is directed that all the 47 vacant posts be offered to the candidates having qualification of Shiksha Shastri, strictly in order of merit. However, if a candidate having qualification of Shiksha Shatri does not come forward to join, then such unfilled post may be offered to the candidate having qualification of Acharya, of course, in the order of merit.

3. Needful shall be done within two weeks.

4. Post the matters for hearing on 15.07.2024.

(ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

3