THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 8532 /2008. Decided on: 24.11.2009 Sanjeev Kumar. ...Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. ...Respondents. ______________________________________________________________________ _ Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Acting Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. No __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Yash Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 3. Ms. Aruna Sharma, Advocate vice Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Advocate for respondents No. 4 and 5. ________________________________________________________________________ The petitioner has assailed the appointment of respondent No. 4 to the post of Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Nehog. The suitability of the petitioner and respondent No. 5 was gone into by the Selection Committee held under the Chairmanship of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nahan. The petitioner has secured 21 marks and respondent No. 5 has secured 22 marks. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. Mr. Yash Chauhan has vehemently argued that the selection of respondent No. 5 is vitiated since his brother I.e. Sh. Om Prakash has participated in the selection process. Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General and Ms. Aruna Sharma have argued that respondent No. 5 was found meritorious by the Selection Committee. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. It is true that the petitioner has secured 21 marks and respondent No. 5 has secured 22 marks as per the recommendations made by the Selection Committee. The petitioner has made a specific allegation in the petition that the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat Nehog, who has participated in the selection process, is the real brother of respondent No. 5. Respondent No. 5 has not chosen to file any reply. Respondent No. 1 to 3 have not denied this fact. Consequently, the selection of respondent No. 5 is vitiated for the simple reason that his brother being Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, Nehog was the member of the Selection Committee. The entire selection process has vitiated after the real brother of the selected candidate has participated in it. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The appointment of respondent No. 5 to the post of Part Time Water Carrier is quashed and set aside. The respondent-State is directed to re do the selection process afresh by considering all the eligible candidates. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. (R.B. Misra) Acting Chief Justice (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 19.11.2009 *awasthi*