IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 4564 of 2008 Date of decision: 27.10.2010. Kaku Ram ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. and ors. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. and Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. for respondents No. 1 to 3. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- i) That the respondents 1 to 3 may kindly be directed to quash and set aside the appointment of respondent No. 4 on the post of Sweeper/Water Carrier in the Govt. Primary School Chambiyar, District Sirmaur. ii) That respondents 1to 3 may kindly be directed to consider/appoint the applicant to the post of Water Carrier/Kahar-cum-Sweeper in Govt. Primary School, Chambiyar, District Sirmaur. 2. In the reply, in para 6 (ii), it is stated as follows:- “ That in reply to this para, it is submitted that as per the information received from the respondent No.3, Distt. Primary Education Officer, Sirmour, the selection of the respondent No.4 has been made by the Selection - 2 - Committee duly constituted for this purpose and the same stands approved by the Deputy Commissioner, Sirmour at Nahan and on the approval of the said selection the respondent No.4 has been appointed as part-time water carrier in Govt. Primary School, Chambiyar. It is further submitted that the alleged annexure A-1 does not entitle the applicant for the appointment of part-time water carrier in the Govt. Primary School, Chambiyar,as the alleged annexure does not at all shows that the applicant worked continuously. Hence, the case of the applicant does not fall within the purview of instructions dated 2.1.1997. the copy of the same attached and marked as annexure R-1. So, in this way the contention of the applicant is not at all admitted that he was deserving candidate to be appointed as part-time water carrier.” 3. There is no rejoinder. In case, the petitioner has any dispute with regard to factual position, as above, it will be open to him to approach the 3rd respondent, in which case, the matter will be duly considered by the 3rd respondent and appropriate action will be taken in accordance with law and justice within four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. 4. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. October 27, 2010. (Justice Kuldip Singh), (Hem/pankaj) Judge.