IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1324 of 2006. Date of decision: 11.8.2009 Surinder Kumar Thakur …. Petitioner Versus State of H.P & Ors. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr.Justice V.K.Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the petitioner: Mr.M.C.Verma, Advocate For the respondents: S/Shri R.K.Bawa, Advocate General with Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy.Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 4. _____________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order of the Tribunal dated January 4, 2006 whereby the original application filed by the petitioner was rejected. The brief facts giving rise to the filing of the petition are that the applications were invited for filling up the post of Part Time Water Carrier in the Education Department in Government Primary School, Doghri. After the interviews were held, the respondent No.5 was 2 selected as Part Time Water Carrier. The petitioner in the original application challenged the selection of the respondent No.5. The main grounds urged were that the petitioner was better qualified and secondly that the father of the present petitioner had donated land for the construction of this school. It is not disputed that as per the policy applicable for the appointment of Part Time Water Carrier, marks have to be allotted to the persons whose family members have donated land for the school. Sh.M.C.Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the affidavit of Sh.Gulab Chand, father of the petitioner Annexure P/H in support of his contention that the father of the petitioner had donated land to the school. This affidavit is dated 12th September, 2002 and the interviews in question were admittedly held on 18th July, 2002. Even in the original application filed before the Tribunal, there is no clear averment that the petitioner at the time of applying for the post of Part Time Water Carrier or at the time of interview had placed any material before the Selection Committee to show that his father had donated land to the school. This ground was taken only at the time of filing of the original application. 3 Even till now no material has been placed on record to show that there was any such document existed prior to 18th July, 2002. As such the petitioner has failed to show that his father had donated land for the construction of the school and the Selection Committee was aware of this fact when the interviews were held in July, 2002. In view of the above discussion, we find no error in the order of the Tribunal. There is no merit in this writ petition which is accordingly rejected. ( Deepak Gupta ) Judge August 11, 2009 (V.K.Ahuja) (m) Judge