IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 13517 of 2008. Decided on: 13.05.2011. _________________________________________________ Krishnu Ram. … Petitioner. Versus The Director of Primary Education & others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. J.R. Poswal, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 3 and 5. Respondent No.4 already ex- parte. Mr. Trilok Jamwal, Advocate for respondent No.6. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner has assailed the appointment of respondent No.6 to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher only on the ground that he was not in possession of I.R.D.P. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - Certificate at the time of interview on 9th February, 2006. He has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure A-7 whereby the I.R.D.P. certificate issued in favour of respondent No.6 has been withdrawn. However, Mr. Trilok Jamwal, learned counsel representing respondent No.6 has drawn the attention of the Court Annexure R-6/4, dated 4th October, 2005 whereby it has been certified that respondent No.6, Karam Chand belongs to I.R.D.P. family. 2. Accordingly, in view of the above position, there is no illegality in the appointment of respondent No.6 to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. 3. Consequently, as per the observations and discussion made hereinabove, the petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. May 13, 2011. (sck).