IN THE HIGH COURTACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1467 of 2007 Date of decision:30.3.2010 Pushpa Devi ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & ors ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. For the Petitioner: Mr. Tarlok Chauhan, Advocate. For Respondents 1 to 5: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Ankush Sood, Addl. A.G. For Respondent No. 8: Mr. P.P.Chauhan, Advocate Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.(Oral) Respondent No. 8 in O.A. No. 1896 of 2002 before the tribunal is the writ petitioner herein. Issue raised in this writ petition pertains to the selection for the appointment to the post of Vidya Upasak in Government Primary School Diswani. The tribunal, on the basis of the materials available on record, found that the applicant had secured 57.25 marks in the selection and that respondent No. 8 (petitioner herein) had secured 58.62 marks. The other party respondents had secured only less marks as compared to the applicant and yet in molding the relief, it is seen that the tribunal has set aside all the appointments. The tribunal has also directed to appoint the applicant in Diswani School and to accommodate the petitioner herein (respondent No. 8) and respondent No. 9 before the tribunal in the other school. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner having secured the highest marks in the selection, her appointment should not have been interfered with. But the fact remains that there are only three schools and three vacancies. In the selection conducted for appointment to the three vacancies, it appears four candidates have participated. Going by the respective marks, secured by the candidates, it is seen that the petitioner herein (respondent No. 8) has secured 58.62 marks, the applicant before the tribunal had secured 57.25 marks and the 9th respondent before the tribunal has secured 55.12 and that respondent No.10 had secured 52.87 marks. Taking note of the fact that there are only three vacancies, the tribunal disposed of the application directing the respondents to accommodate the applicant before the tribunal in Diswani school and accommodate respondents No. 8 and 9 in the other schools. According to the petitioner, her appointment at Diswani school could not have been disturbed, she being the most meritorious candidate. It is seen that the petitioner (respondent No. 8) had applied for appointment in three schools, whereas the applicant had applied only for Diswani school. It is in that background of the factual position, apparently the directions were issued by molding the relief by the tribunal. We find from the order of the tribunal itself that only the applicant, respondent No. 8 (petitioner herein) and respondent No.9 were directed to be accommodated. In the above circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:- The applicant, before the tribunal, respondent No. 8 in this writ petition, will be accommodated at Government Primary School, Diswani. The petitioner herein(respondent No. 8 before the tribunal) will be accommodated at Government Primary School, Kambraon and respondent No. 9, before the tribunal, being third meritorious candidate, will be accommodated at Government Primary School, Tikkar. There will be a direction to the third respondent, Deputy Director of Primary Education, Shimla to pass appropriate orders in the light of the above directions, within a period of one month from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. The order of the tribunal, under challenge, will stand modified to the above extent. Needless to say that the order, dated 30th July, 2004, passed by the tribunal (Annexure P-4) will also stand modified to the extent required. The third respondent will also pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and justice with regard to the consequential benefits. Copy Dasti. . (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice March 30, 2010(K/s) ( Justice R.B. Misra ), Judge