IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.2254 /2009 Decided on: 6.7.2009 Smt. Sunita. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jagdish Bhalla, C.J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1. For the petitioner : Mr. Neeraj K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. A.G. for respondents No.1 to 4 and 6. None for respondent No.5. The petitioner was appointed as Language Teacher in Government Senior Secondary School, Kungrat, Tehsil Haroli, District Una by Parent Teacher Association. The validity of the appointment of the petitioner was assailed by one Sh. Ashwani Kumar before the Committee constituted by the State 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Government pursuant to notification dated 27.5.2008. It was primarily contended by the complainant that due publicity was not given by the Parent Teacher Association at the time when the post in question was filled up. The Inquiry Committee headed by the Additional District Magistrate, Una looked into the allegations made in the complaint. The Committee has recorded the statements of the parties. It was necessary for the Parent Teacher Association to give wider publicity before filling up the post in question. It is evident from the findings recorded by the Committee that the notice dated 14.11.2006 was not even circulated to the adjoining Panchayats and Schools. It was also not displayed on the notice board of the school. The interview was conducted by the Parent Teacher Association on 24.11.2006, but no records of the same have been maintained. There is no force in the submission of Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma that the petitioner’s appointment could not be looked into on the basis of the notification issued by the State Government on 27.5.2008. It was necessary even as per the earlier policy to give wider publicity before filling up the post by the Parent Teacher Association. The Committee has gone into the entire gamut of the case. The findings recorded by the Committee are based on facts. The Deputy Commissioner, Una has also passed a speaking order on the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the findings of the Inquiry Committee dated 1.12.2008/17.12.2008. There is no infirmity or illegality in 3 the order dated 26.5.2009 passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Consequently, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. In view of the disposal of the main petition, the application pending, if any, stands disposed of. (Jagdish Bhalla), C.J. 6.7. 2009 (Rajiv Sharma ), J. *awasthi*