1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 8652 of 2008 Date of decision: 24.12.2010 ________________________________________________________________ Statan Dass .....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. .....Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Ramakant Sharma,, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for respondents No.1 and 2. None for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4. V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral). The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide paras 7 (I) to (iii): “(i) That the recommendation made by the respondent No.2 for the appointment of the post of Part Time Water Carrier of the respondent No.4 may very kindly be quashed and set aside. (ii) That the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 may very kindly be restrained from making any appointment as Part Time Watter Carrier in Govt. Primary School, Siarla, Teh. Rampur, District Shimla, H. P. (iii) That the respondent No.3 may kindly be 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 restrained from issuing any appointment letter in favour of the Respondent No.4.” 2. In reply on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2, the following stand has been taken vide para 6 on merits : “That in reply to para No.6 and its sub-paras it is submitted that the selection committee headed by the SDO (Civil) as its chairman and three other members Pradhan of the concerned Panchayat, Block Primary Education Officer and Centre Head Teacher of the centre concerned of the respective block scrutinized the application received in response of the vide publicity and awarded the marks on the basis of the documents submitted by the candidates and as per the notification issued by the Govt. in this regard. On the basis of recommendation of the selection committee the candidate securing the higher marks has been appointed. In the instant case, the applicant and respondent No.4 has obtained the marks as given below: Applicant Distance from home to school Whether land was donated SC/ST/O BC Whether unemployed family Viva Total marks Yes --- Yes Yes ------- ------ 10 ------ 3 5 3.5 21.5 Respondent No.4. Distance from home to school Whether land was donated SC/ST/O BC Whether unemployed family Viva Total marks Yes --- Yes Yes ------- ------ 10 ------ 3 5 3.75 21.75 Since the respondent No.4 has secured 21.75 marks and the applicant 21.5 marks, therefore, the respondent No.4 has been offered appointment on the recommendation of the 3 selection committee in accordance with the instruction.” 3. In view of the above reply, in case the petitioner still has any surviving grievance with regard to factual or legal aspects of the matter, he shall be free to make a representation to respondent No.2 along with copy of this judgment within one month from today and the said respondent shall consider and take a final decision thereon within next two months,s after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, if so desired. 4. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending CMP(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 24th December, 2010 (jai)