IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP. No. 2440 of 2009. Date of Decision:30.8.2010. _______________________________________________ Anil Mitto. ….Petitioner. Versus. Stte of H.P. and others. ….Respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1?.No. For the petitioner : Ms. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate. For Respondent 1 to 3. : Mr. P.K.Sharma, Addl. Advocate General. For Respondent No. 4. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). The larger question addressed in this writ petition as to whether a person having higher academic qualification(s), who could not supply details of marks of the basic minimum education qualification, was entitled to get preference over those who possessed the basic eligibility criteria. 2. The petitioner had applied for the post of Frash- cum-Chowkidar-cum-Peon, which was to be filled in 100% by direct recruitments and the basic minimum educational Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment. 2 qualification required was Middle pass with age limit between 18 to 45 years (Annexure:R-1). 3. The case set out by the petitioner was that he passed his All India Secondary School Examination in 1987 from the Central Board of Secondary Education and that there was no board examination conducted by this Board for class- VIII. In these circumstances, preference for educational qualification in terms of the marks awarded was claimed. 4. In order to resolve this controversy, this Court impleaded the Principal, Kendriya Vidhyala, Shimla for the limited purpose of finding out as to whether (a) any examination was conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education at the middle level (b) if not, whether the school awarded marks for the middle examination. In response thereto, it was submitted by learned Assistant Solicitor General that no examination was conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education. However, the result of Class-VIII examination in which the petitioner was declared successful has been placed on the record of this case showing the individual awards. This has been authenticated by the school authorities. A copy of this has been handed over to learned Addl. Advocate General. 5. In reply in the writ petition, the respondents have stated that the petitioner should have produced 8th standard certificate and in case there was no board of examination of 8th standard, he should have produced detail marks or grade which he had obtained in this examination in the school. 3 Since he had not done this and produced the educational qualification of a higher grade, there was, of course, a presumption that he had qualified 8th standard and he would be given the minimum prescribed marks for his educational qualification. It is in this background that the record of the educational qualification of the petitioner was called for to ascertain the grade which he had obtained in his 8th standard. The marks sheet being authenticated by the Principal of the school, there is no dispute that the petitioner had obtained/had been awarded those marks at the 8th class examination. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with direction that the case of the petitioner be considered in the light of the marks awarded at the 8th standard examination amongst other factors. The result shall be declared on or before 16th September, 2010. Interim order shall stand vacated. All miscellaneous applications are also disposed of. 6. This Court wishes to place on record the appreciation to the assistance rendered by learned Assistant Solicitor General of India as also the Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, Shimla. Copy dasti on usual terms. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. August 30,2010(R) 4