IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. (T) No. 15897 of 2008. Decided on 22nd June, 2011. _____________________________________________________ Yash Pal Singh. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 to 4 and 6. : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. None for respondent No. 5. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Respondent-State has decided to fill up various posts of Primary Assistant Teacher in District Sirmaur. Petitioner submitted an application for considering his candidature for appointment as Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Shya Mallag. The last date of receipt of application was 25.08.2007. He was interviewed by the duly constituted selection committee and the result was declared on 09.10.2007. However, name of the petitioner was not recommended by the selection committee on the ground that he was not in possession of requisite essential qualification. 2. Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the Government of India, 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - Ministry of Personnel Public Grievance and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training) has awarded the graduation certificate to the petitioner vide Annexure A-1 on 31st October, 2002. However, the graduation certificate was not treated as essential qualification by the selection committee, which led to the denial of appointment to the petitioner as Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Shya Mallag. 3. Mr. Vikas Rathore, learned Deputy Advocate General on the basis of the averments contained in the reply submits that in fact the State Government has already issued instructions on 12.01.2006, whereby the Ex-servicemen having graduation qualification from Army without 10+2 qualification were to be considered equal to graduates for awarding 10 marks under the scheme for the purpose of selection of P.A.T. candidates. According to him, the selection committee was not aware of the instructions dated 12.01.2006. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an Ex- serviceman and has applied for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher against this category before the last date of receipt of application, i.e., 25.08.2007. He was duly interviewed by the selection committee. Petitioner has been issued graduation certificate vide Annexure A-1, dated 31st October, 2002 by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievance and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training). It appears that the selection committee has not considered the case of - 3 - petitioner only on the pretext that since the petitioner was not having +2 qualification, he could not be awarded 10 marks being a graduate. However, this position has already been clarified by the State Government as per the contents of the reply vide instructions issued on 12.01.2006, whereby the Ex-servicemen having graduation qualification from Army without 10+2 qualification were to be considered equal to graduates. Thus, the selection committee has seriously erred in declaring the petitioner ineligible for the post in question. 6. In the reply filed on behalf of respondents No. 1, 2, 4 and 6, it is averred that the petitioner was eligible to be considered for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher, but at this belated stage, he could not be offered appointment as no post of Primary Assistant Teacher was available in Government Primary School, Shaya Mallag. It is, thus, evident that the petitioner was possessing the essential qualification and his name was required to be considered and recommended by the selection committee for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. Petitioner has been deprived of the right to be considered and appointed to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher by the selection committee in a wrongful manner. 7. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. The respondent-State is directed to consider the case of petitioner for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Shya Mallag, Education Block Sarahan on the basis of the application submitted by the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this - 4 - judgment by the petitioner. In the eventuality of the petitioner being found suitable, he shall be offered appointment letter to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Shya Mallag or any other school in close proximity within the same period. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge June 22, 2011. (bhupender) - 5 - `