IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 13568 of 2008 (OA No.1465 of 2006 Date of decision: 22.4.2010 Piroo Ram . ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P.& Ors. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. Virender Rathore, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl. Advocate General with Mrs. Shubh Mahajan, Dy. Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. Shashi Shirsoo, Advocate for respondent No.5. Kuldip Singh, Judge(Oral) The petitioner in the writ petition has prayed a direction to respondent No.5 to execute the agreement with petitioner and accept the joining report of petitioner on the post of Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Kahanu, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. 2. The case of petitioner is that he was selected by a duly constituted Selection Committee for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Kahanu. The respondent No.3 had notified the selection of petitioner vide letter dated Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes …2… 28.3.2006. The respondent No.4 had informed respondent No.5 vide letter dated 29.3.2006 that the petitioner has been selected as Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Kahanu. The respondent No.4 had also directed the respondent No.5 to do the needful. The petitioner vide letter dated 1.4.2006 Annexure A-4 requested respondent No.5 to accept his joining report and execute the agreement on requisite stamp paper. It is the case of the petitioner that despite repeated requests, the respondent No.5 is not executing the contract with the petitioner and allowing him to join as Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Kahanu. 3. The respondent No.3 in the reply has admitted that the petitioner was selected to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher by duly constituted committee, but respondent No.5 is not implementing the appointment letter Annexure-A. The respondent No.5 has also filed reply and has taken the stand that in the present case while conducting interviews for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher, the replying respondent, President, Gram Panchayat was not associated in the selection process for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. He has also stated that the father of the petitioner is in Government job in H.P. Public Works Department in Sub Division, Churag, Tehsil, Karsog. 4. The perusal of reply of respondent No.5 indicates that at the most respondent No.5 has stated that he was not associated in the selection process for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher but it is not his case that he was not included in the interview committee which selected the candidates. He has not made clear why he was …3… not associated in the selection process. The respondent No.3, Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Karsog has specifically stated in his reply that petitioner was selected to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher by duly constituted committee but respondent No.5 is not implementing the appointment letter Annexure-A. In these circumstances, the stand of respondent No.5 that he was not associated in the interview process cannot be relied. The petitioner has been selected on the post of Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Kahanu, but despite repeated requests by the petitioner and direction given by the concerned officer, the respondent No.5 is not allowing the petitioner to join as Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Kahanu and execute the requisite contract. The petitioner has made out a case in his favour. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed. Respondent No.5 is directed to allow the petitioner to join as Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Kahanu after executing requisite contract with petitioner within a period of four weeks from today. The petition stands disposed of. April 22, 2010 (Kuldip Singh), (sks) Judge.