IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA C.W.P. No. 771 of 2008 Date of decision: 8 . 7. 2009 Virender Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others ……Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 . For the Petitioner: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. R. K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Vikas Rathore,and Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra Dy. Advocate General, for respondent 1 to 3 Deepak Gupta, J (Oral). By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that the State be directed to release the grant-in-aid to the Parent Teacher Association, Government Senior Secondary School Garli Tehsil Barsar District Hamirpur, H.P., so that, the petitioner can be paid salary in accordance with the Grant-in- Aid Rules issued by the State Government. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is a B.Sc B.Ed. was appointed as TGT (Non-Medical) by the PTA of G.S.S.S. Garli in October, 2001. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. - 2 - This appointment of the petitioner was continued from time to time. In the year 2006, the State of H.P. issued the Grant-in- Aid Rules, which provided that if the P.T.A appoints qualified teachers in accordance with the instructions laid down by the State Government then the State Government would release grant-in-Aid to the School on the recommendation of the Principal, so that, higher salary can be paid to the teacher appointed by the P.T.A. Reply has been filed by the State and it has been stated that the appointment of the petitioner was not made in accordance with the Rules and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any higher salary. It is also alleged that in fact, the service of the petitioner has since been dispensed with and some other person appointed in his place. The petitioner was appointed by the P.T.A. without inviting any application from the general public. Resolution dated 24.12.2001 clearly shows that at the meeting of the Parents Teachers Association, it was unanimously decided to appoint the petitioner as P.T.A teacher. When the petitioner was appointed, he faced no competition. The general Public was not made aware that such a post is likely to be filled in. The - 3 - appointment of the petitioner has been virtually through back-door. Now the petitioner cannot be granted higher salary on the basis of such a back-door entry. As far as the appointment of fresh person is concerned, in case, the petitioner is aggrieved thereby; he may file a separate petition in this regard. In view of the above discussion, the petition is rejected. CMP No. 1139/2008 Rejected. (Deepak Gupta),J. July 8, 2009 (Surinder Singh),J (cm)