IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Civil Writ Petition No. 1470 of 2007. Decided on: 29.7.2008. __________________________________________________ Shri Puran Chand … Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. G.R. Palsara, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Vikas Rathor, Dy. A.G. For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Tek Chand Sharma, Advocate. For Respondents No. 3 & 4: None. ___________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge. (Oral) A challenge has been laid in this writ petition to the selection of respondent No.2 to the post of Panchayat Sahayak in sequel to interviews held on 14.9.2005 in the office of Block Development Officer, Chachiot at Gohar, District Mandi and to the order dated 30.7.2007 passed by the S.D.O. (C), Chachiot at Gohar, District Mandi. H.P. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the State Government has framed the rules called “H.P. Panchayati Raj (Gram Panchayat Sahayak Appointment and 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?No. 2 Service Conditions) Rules, 2005, hereinafter referred to as the Rules. It is stipulated under Rule 3 that there shall be one post of Panchayat Sahayak in every Gram Panchayat and he shall be paid remuneration of six hundred rupees per month during the training period and one thousand rupees per month after appointment. The minimum educational qualification required for the post is provided under Rule 4. The age and other eligibility conditions are stipulated and provided under Rule 5. The mode of submission of applications has been stipulated under Rule 6. It is evident from the bare reading of these Rules that two marks are to be awarded for every one year of experience in relevant nature of duties in any Panchayati Raj Institution, Government office, Government undertaking/institution/agency in a clerical capacity. The maximum marks which can be allotted under head ‘Experience’ are 10. The petitioner has submitted application in accordance with these Rules for being considered for the post of Panchayat Sahayak. He had enclosed with the application the copies of certificates, Annexures P-5 and P-6, issued by the competent authority certifying therein that he was discharging the duties of clerical nature. He was called for interview on 14.9.2005 in the office of the Block Development Officer, Chachiot at Gohar, District Mandi. Similarly, the respondent No.2 submitted application and was also called for interview on 14.9.2005. He had enclosed experience certificate, Annexure P-10, issued by Rao Gas Service. The respondent No.2 was selected to the post in question. The petitioner assailed the selection of respondent No.2 before the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Chachiot at Gohar on 3 8.11.2005 in case No. 3/2005. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by the competent authority on 30.7.2007. Mr. G.R. Palsara has strenuously argued that the order dated 30.7.2007 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Chachiot at Gohar is not sustainable in the eyes of law. He then contended that the Selection Committee has erred in law by ignoring the certificates, Annexures P-5 and P-6, issued in favour of the petitioner and wrongly considering the certificate, Annexure P- 10, issued by Rao Gas Service in favour of respondent No.2. The learned Additional Advocate General has supported the order dated 30.7.2007 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Chachiot at Gohar and the selection of respondent No.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings carefully. A short question involved in this petition is whether the certificate issued to the candidates under the aforesaid rules can be issued by any authority not stipulated in rule 6 (B). It is evident from the language employed in rule 6 (B) that two marks can be awarded for every one year experience of duties if the candidate had worked in any Panchayati Raj Institution, Government office, Government undertaking, Institution, Agency in clerical capacity. The expression Institution/Agency has to be read ejusdem generis with Panchayati Raj Institution and Government office. It pre- supposes that the certificate of experience could only be issued by the Governmental agency and not by any private agency. The petitioner had annexed with his application the copies of the experience certificates issued by the Gram Panchayat vide Annexures P-5 and P-6. The certificate issued to respondent No.2 4 is by a private agency, i.e. Rao Gas Service, Annexure P-10. The Selection Committee had taken into consideration the certificate issued in favour of respondent No.2 by a private Gas Agency. However, the certificate issued in favour of the petitioner by the Gram Panchayat has been over-looked. The petitioner ought to have been awarded marks for the experience as stipulated under the rules. The experience certificate of respondent No.2 could not be taken into consideration by the Selection Committee at all. The Selection Committee had wrongly awarded 10 marks to respondent No.2 under the head ‘experience’. It is re-iterated that Rao Gas Service could not be equated at par with any of the Government institutions stipulated under rule 6 (B). Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and order dated 30.7.2007, Annexure P7, is quashed and set aside. The selection of respondent No.2 to the post of Panchayat Sahayak is declared null and void. The Selection Committee is directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh and to take into consideration the experience certificates, Annexures P-5 and P-6. The Selection Committee shall meet within a period of three weeks from today. If the petitioner is found suitable after allotting him the marks under the head ‘experience’, his case will be recommended for appointment to the post of Panchayat Sahayak. No cost. (Rajiv Sharma), J. July 29, 2008. (cr)