CWP No.2121 of 2009. 25.06.2009 Present: Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Deputy Advocate Generals, for respondents No.1 to 4. CMP No.4237 of 2009. Allowed. CWP No.2121 of 2009. The petitioner was appointed by the PTA on 12th October, 2006. The enquiry was conducted after the complaint was received against her on 10th June, 2008. The Enquiry Committee has categorically found in para 2 of the proceedings dated 19th April, 2008 that the very constitution of the PTA was not inconformity with the norms prescribed by the Government, as per para 2.33.2 of the HP Education Code 2001, which reads as under:- “There will be a general body of PTA of which all the parents or guardians of the students studying in the school ad teachers of the school will be the members.” Admittedly, Shri Parshotam Lal is not the father of any of the students who were perusing their studies in Government Middle School, Kolka. Accordingly, the recommendation made by the PTA cannot be termed in accordance with law. Consequently, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is dismissed. CMPs No.4235 and 4236 of 2009. In view of the dismissal of the main writ petition, these applications are also dismissed. (Jagdish Bhalla), C.J. June 25, 2009. (Rajiv Sharma), J. (rc)