IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No.12557 of 2008 Decided on: April 7, 2011. Darshna Devi …….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …….Respondents. _________________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner : None. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr.J.K. Verma, Dy.A.G., for respondents No.1 to 4 and 6. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) Writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “a That the selection and appointment of respondent No.5 as PTT Craft Teacher at GBV H-Kothi Tehsil Salooni, District Chamba, H.P. vide appointment order No.SSA-SLN-H-1/-239-242, dated 20.8.2005, be ordered to be quashed being illegal, against the policy, against law, against the principles of natural justice and in violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. b. That the respondents be ordered to appoint the applicant as PTT Craft Teacher at GBV H-Kothi Tehsil Salooni, District Chamba, H.P., w.e.f. the date of appointment of respondent No.5 with arrear of pay and consequential benefits.” 2. In the reply, at paragraph 3, it is stated as follows: “That the present Original Application filed by the applicant is not maintainable, because the selection of respondent No.5 i.e. Smt.Lata Mukesh as Part Time Craft Teacher has been made by the Selection Committee on the basis of the merit and according to the 2 norms laid down by KGBV. It is further submitted that for the post of Part Time Craft Teacher, there was no criteria for higher education, therefore, the applicant has not been awarded marks for being higher educated. However, the applicant had been a holder of ITI diploma, hence she has been awarded marks of ITI diploma holder. Apart from this, the applicant had submitted three years experience certificate at the time of interview as such she has been awarded marks for being experienced. Hence, the present Original Application filed by the applicant deserves to be dismissed.” 3. In case the petitioner has still any grievance left, she may approach the first respondent by filing a representation. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice April 7, 2011 (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (tilak/jai) Judge.