IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 8795 of 2008 Decided on : 08.12.2010. Ashok Kumar ..…Petitioner. Versus State of H.P and others. .… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner :Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the Respondent No.1 to 3. : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General Respondents No.4 and 5 Ex-parte. V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral) The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 7 (i) and (ii) : “ (i) That the selection of the respondent No.5 may very kindly be quashed and set aside. (ii) That the applicant may very kindly be ordered to be appointed as Part Time Water Carrier in Govt. Primary School Rey, Education Block Fatehpur, Distt. Kangra, H.P as per the instructions dated 1.9.2001 contained in Annexure A-1, as he has been working in abovesaid institution since November, 1999 after having been appointed by the PTA.” 2. In the reply, filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, the following stand has been taken vide para 3 : “6. That the present original application filed by the applicant is not maintainable because the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No, 2 appointment of the respondent No.5 Smt. Tishla Devi has been made on the recommendation of the selection committee which has been duly notified by the Govt. for the purpose of selection of Part Time Water Carrier in the Education department and the selection of the respondent No.5 has been made by the selection committee as per the policy framed/notified by the Govt. for the purpose selection of Part Time Water carrier which is clear from the Performa of marks as supplied by the Block Primary Education Officer, Fatepur i.e. Respondent No.3 as the Performa of marks shows that the respondent No.5 have secured 18 marks whereas the applicant has secured 16 marks, the Copy of the Performa marks is reproduced as under : Applicant :- Distance from home to school Whether land was donated SC/ST/OBC Whether unemployed family Viva Total Marks Yes --- Yes Yes --- --- 10 --- 3 --- 3 16 Respondent No.5 Distance from home to school Whether land was donated SC/ST/OBC Whether unemployed family Viva Total Marks Yes --- --- Yes --- --- 10 --- 3 --- 5 18 So, in view of these facts the respondent/state has committed no wrong by appointing the respondent No.5 as Part Time Water Carrier at Govt. Primary School, Ray Khas. It is further submitted that after issuing the notification dated 27.7.2001 no candidates can be appointed/kept as part time water carrier by 3 the Parent Teacher Association of the Gram Panchayat, therefore, if the certificate annexure A-4 has been issued by the Headmaster Govt. Primary School, Ray Khas the same does not at all entitled the applicant for regular appointment. Apart from this it is further submitted that the annexure A-1 as annexed by the applicant only pertains to those candidate who had been appointed as PTWC by the competent authority in accordance with the policy. Since the applicant has not at all been appointed by any competent authority as Part Time water carrier therefore she has no right to claim for regular appointment because no body can be appointed as Part Time Water carrier in the school contrary to the policy as framed by the Govt. Hence the contention of the applicant is totally wrong that the respondent No.5 has wrongly been appointed by the applicant by ignoring his legitimate claim.” 3. Rejoinder refuting the stand on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and reiterating the averments set up in the petition has also been filed. 4. In view of the above, in case the petitioner still has any surviving grievance with regard to the factual and legal position, he may certainly point out the same by way of appropriate representation before respondent No.2/competent authority within a period of one month from today along with copy of this judgment and the said respondent/competent authority shall decide the same within another three months after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the private respondent No.5, if so desired. 4 5. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending CMP(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. 8th December, 2010 CS