Ajai Lamba, J.@mdashThis writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the
nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents to consider the appointment of the Petitioner as regular from the date he qualified the test
conducted by Subordinate Services Selection Board, Punjab.
2. It has been pleaded that the Petitioner joined Punjab School Education Department as Laboratory Attendant on 5.11.1969. Vide Order dated
16.2.1972, the Petitioner was promoted to the post of Clerk on adhoc basis.
3. In the year 1976, the Subordinate Services Selection Board, Punjab conducted a test of employees working against Class IV posts, for
promotion to Class III posts as Clerks. The Petitioner, who belongs to scheduled caste category, passed the test and his name was recommended
to Respondent No. 2 i.e. Director Public Instructions (SE), Punjab, vide letter Annexure P-2, purportedly, issued on 8.6.1977.
4. Vide letter dated 13.7.1978 (Annexure P-3), however, the name of the Petitioner alongwith other selected candidates was forwarded to the
Respondents in order of merit for appointment as Clerk. Perusal of letter Annexure P-3 indicates that the Petitioner was asked to join Agriculture
Department as Clerk.
5. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner did not join in response to Annexure P-3. Till date the Petitioner continues to serve the Education
Department. Factually, the Petitioner did not accept letter Annexure P-3 and did not join as Clerk in Agriculture Department after his selection by
the Subordinate Services Selection Board, Punjab. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner asserts the right of the Petitioner to join Education
Department in terms of letter dated 8.6.1977 (Annexure P-2).
6. As per the stand of the Respondents, name of the Petitioner, after his selection by Subordinate Services Selection Board, Punjab was
recommended for regular appointment vide letter dated 13.7.1978 (Annexure P-3) only.
7. Learned Counsel for the Respondents has taken a specific stand that Annexure P-2 is forged. The letter does not contain any memo number.
The letter is not addressed to any department rather, it has been addressed to the Petitioner. Learned Counsel contends that it appears to be a
manipulation at some level and there is no trace of document, Annexure P-2, in the files of Education Department as no such letter was addressed
by the Subordinate Services Selection Board, Punjab to the Education Department.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that there are disputed questions of facts which cannot be resolved, without taking
evidence, in extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
9. The petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to take alternate remedy as might be permissible in law.
