CWP(T) No. 12359 of 2008 18.11.2011 Present: Mr. Dhruv Shaunak, Advocate, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Dy. Advocate General with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Dy. A.G. for respondents No. 1 and 2. Petitioner has assailed the appointment of private respondent as T.T. Coach on contract basis. It is his grievance that the appointment smacks of malafides and favouritism. 2. Having perused the record I am of the considered view that there is no merit in the petition and the same needs to be rejected. 3. Averments with regard to favouritism are vague, unspecific and not supported by any material. Similar is the case qua allegations of malafides. Petitioner has not impleaded any member of the Selection Committee either. 4. Further respondents have explained that petitioner’s appointment, in the year 2000 as T. T. Coach was not by the Department of Youth Services & Sports, Government of Himachal Pradesh but by the H.P. Sports Council which is an independent and autonomous body and not a wing of the State. It has been further explained that appointment of private respondent is in accordance with law and after fully complying with the procedural requirements applications were invited, Selection Committee constituted, which objectively considered the comparative merit of the candidates and only -2- on the recommendations made by them appointment orders were issued in favour of the private respondent. 5. Consequently the present petition, devoid of any merit, is dismissed. Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. November 18, 2011 (PK)