IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 11466 of 2008. Decided on: May 3, 2011. Santosh Kumari Versus State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, Advocate, vice counsel. For the respondents: Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. AG. for respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate, for respondent No. 6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:- “i) That the order of selection and appointment of the Respondent No. 6 against the post of Prathmik Sahayak Adhayapak in Govt. Primary School, Mechkehar may kindly be quashed and the Respondent may please be directed to select and appoint the applicant on the same post of Prathmik Sahayak Adhayapak, w.e.f., the date, the Respondent No. 6 has been selected and appointed alongwith all consequential benefits, i.e., seniority, arrears of pay and allowances.” 2. In the reply at paragraph-3 and 6, it is stated as follows: “3. That the present original application filed by the applicant is not maintainable, because as per the information received from the respondent No. 4 Block Primary Education Officer, Chauntra Tehsil Jogindernagar, the selection of respondent No. 6 Sh. Anil Kumar as Primary Assistant Teacher for Govt. Primary School Meehkehar has been made by selection committee in view of the notification as issued by the Govt. for this purpose, which is clear from the copy of the proforma of the marks as prepared by the selection committee, during the course of interview. According to the proforma of marks as supplied by the respondent No. 4 Block Primary Education Officer Chauntra Tehsil Jogindernagar Distt. Mandi, the applicant secured 58 marks where as the respondent secured 59.2 marks. So, in view of these facts no wrong and illegality has been committed by the respondent state by selecting/appointing the respondent No. 6 Shri Anil Kumar as Primary 2 Assistant Teacher in Govt. Primary School Meehkehar. Hence, the present original application filed by the applicant deserves dismissal.” 3. There is no rejoinder. In view of the factual position as above, there is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 3rd May, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (vs) Judge.