CWP No.5759 of 2010. 30.8.2011 Present: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No.1 &2. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for respondent No.3. Mr. Neeraj Gupta, counsel for respondent No.4. The petitioner was initially appointed as Cook for Mid Day Meal in Government Primary School, Saparalu Education Block, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. on 6.9.2004. She had been working as such till her services were terminated vide order Annexure-P2, which is not dated. It is on record that a letter was written by the Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Kangra at Dharamshala to the Block Elementary Education Officer, Dehra, Annexure-P1, dated 28.7.2010, in regard to the petitioner Kalasan Devi and it was clarified that in case two persons are appointed, the services of junior have to be dispensed with and senior in age has to be retained. These instructions have been reiterated in the reply filed by respondents No.1 and 2. However, they have taken the plea that the majority of members of the Committee had decided to retain the services of respondent No.4, as Cook and accordingly the services of respondent No.4 were retained. During the course of arguments, it has been pointed out that the petitioner’s date of birth was 10.9.1963, while the date of birth of respondent No.4 was 27.9.1974 and according to the instructions, respondent No.4 being junior in age, her services were required to be dispensed with firstly in preference to the petitioner. These facts are to be verified by respondent No.2, who shall consider the case of both the :2: petitioner and respondent No.4 and the material on record placed before him and shall decide the matter in accordance with the instructions issued by the State Government and as per the rules. The petition is allowed accordingly to the extent that the copy of the order shall be sent to respondent No.2 by the Advocate General Office, who shall decide the matter afresh within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the communication after hearing the petitioner and respondent No.4 and look into the documents, which are produced before him by the parties, if any. Petitioner may file the copy of order before respondent No.2. The orders shall be passed accordingly by respondent No.2. After the matter is decided by respondent No.2, he shall convey the orders to the Appointing Committee as per the rules prevalent and give appointment to petitioner or respondent No.4, as the case may be. Copy Dasti. August 30, 2011. ( V.K. Ahuja ), J. (mlg)