IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 3922 of 2008. Date of Decision: 26.7.2010 Ms.Kala Vati …Petitioner. Versus. State of H.P. and others …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? No For the Petitioner(s): Ms.Salochana Kaundal, Advocate. For the Respondent(s): Mr.Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy.A.G. for Respondents-State. Deepak Gupta, J.(oral) The petitioner who is a lady applied for the post of constable which was advertised in the year 1996. Out of 176 posts of constables, four were reserved for women. The petitioner qualified all the physical criteria but was not selected. She therefore filed the present petition in which the main allegations made are that the selection was made on extraneous grounds and due to political considerations. It was also specifically averred in the petition that respondent No.4 had been appointed in violation of the physical criteria. As far as respondent No.4 is concerned, the minimum height requirement for a lady belonging to the general category was 5’ 2”. 2 According to the petitioner, respondent No.4 did not meet this requirement. The State in its reply has averred that in fact respondent No.4 was again measured at PTC Daroh and she was found to be under height and therefore discharged vide letter dated 21.12.1996. As far as the other allegations made by the petitioner are concerned they are very general in nature. No specific instance of political interference has been given. No person has been arrayed as a party even though allegations of malafide have been levelled. There is nothing to show that the process of selection was illegal or that the selection was done to help some persons. Since the main grievance in respect of respondent No.4 has already been redressed by the respondents-State and no other allegations stands proved, the petition is dismissed. No costs. July 26 , 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) PV Judge.