IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.: 665 of 2009. Date of decision: 23.4.2009 Ramesh Chand … Petitioner. Versus State of H.P and others. …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. G.R.Palsra, Advocate. For the respondents No. 1 & 2: Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Deputy Advocate General. Per Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) In our order dated 13th March, 2009 we have culled out the main points in issue in the present writ petition. We had clearly held that it was the duty of the Parents Teachers Association to have issued call letters to all the candidates who had applied for the post. Shri Palsra, had stated that call-letters were sent to the candidates. We had directed that the respondent No.3 should produce the record. The respondent No.3, Shri Parma Nand, President, PTA, Govt. Sr.Sec.School, Kot, Illaqua Tungal, Sub Tehsil Kotli, Distt. Mandi, who is present in person, has produced the record. The only record produced with regard to the intimation given to the persons who had applied for the post is a notice, according to which everybody was informed that the 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 interviews will be held on 15th September, 2006. There is nothing to show as to where this notice was affixed. Admittedly, no individual letters were sent to the candidates informing them about the time and date of interviews. Once applications had been filed by various candidates, it was the duty of the PTA to inform all the candidates in writing about the date fixed for the interviews. No such letters are available on the record. Therefore, the finding of the Inquiry Committee that the other candidates were not informed about the date of the interviews appears to be correct. The decision of the Inquiry Committee calls for no interference. The writ petition is dismissed, in limine. ( Deepak Gupta ), J. April 23, 2009, ( V.K Ahuja ), J. ™