24 Yrs Later, Punjab & Haryana High Court Awards ₹5 Lakh Damages To Man Denied Naib Tehsildar Post Due To Miscalculated Marks

The Punjab & Haryana High Court recently awarded Rs. 5 lakh in damages to a man who could not qualify for the Naib Tehsildar exam conducted in 1996 due to a miscalculation of 2 marks.

Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma held that it was appropriate to grant damages to the petitioner for being deprived of appointment due to wrongful calculation of his merit instead of considering him for appointment after more than 24 years.

"This Court deems it appropriate to grant damages to the petitioner instead of relief for consideration for appointment after a period of more than 24 years and to award him a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- for being deprived of appointment on account of wrongful calculation of his merit."

The Court was hearing a plea seeking the quashing of candidate selections for the Naib Tehsildar position conducted in 1996, alleging nepotism and favouritism. Petitioner also sought consideration for his appointment by quashing the merit list declared in 1999.

The petitioner raised serious allegations, claiming that the selection process had been tainted by nepotism and favouritism. He argued that candidates with close ties to political leaders and members of the selection committee had been chosen. It was also contended certain appointees did not meet the minimum qualification requirements, yet they were granted positions.

However, the court found insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations of nepotism and favouritism and thus found them to be 'bald allegations'.

It was also submitted that if the petitioner had been allotted 2 additional marks for his LLB degree, which was not granted, he would have also been on the merit list. 

The Court acknowledged the petitioner's legitimate claim for two marks for his LLB degree and held that said marks should have been awarded to him. 

"If the marks are added, he gets marks more than the last cut off. However, at this belated stage, after a period of more than 24 years, it would not be appropriate to disturb the selections which have already been conducted and the concerned selected candidates having put more than 24 years of service, their services cannot be dispensed with." 

However, despite the merit of the petitioner's claim, the court decided not to disrupt the selections that had already taken place after a lapse of more than 24 years. Additionally, it was determined that creating new positions was not a feasible solution at this juncture.

Thus, instead of ordering the petitioner's appointment, the court awarded him a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 for being unjustly denied the position due to errors in merit calculation.

The State was directed to make the awarded payment within three months, with the option to recover costs from the members of the Selection Committee.

Accordingly, the petition was allowed in part. 

Appearance: Advocate R.S. Manhas for the petitioner.

Vishnav Gandhi, DAG, Punjab.

Rajiv Atma Ram, Sr.Advocate, assisted by Sanah Saini, Advocate, for respondents no.4 to 7.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 178