IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 15991 of 2008 Decided on : 28.10.2010 Ganga Dass ..…Petitioner. Versus State of H. P. & others …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the Petitioner : Mr. L.N. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa A.G. with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner claims the benefit of the judgment of this Court rendered in State of Himachal Pradesh & others vs. Sarb Dayal in CWP No. 180 of 2001 decided on 19.7.2007. But even if the daily waged service is counted also, it is seen from the reply filed by the respondents that the petitioner would not complete 10 years of service, which only entitles him for pension. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice (Justice V.K. Sharma) Judge 28th October, 2010. Lsp/VT* 2 4. Pending CMP, if any, shall also stand disposed of as infructuous. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice (V.K. Sharma) Judge. 3rd June, 2010. Lsp* 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 1701 of 2010. Decided on: 20th May, 2010. Shilpa Aggrawal. …Petitioner. Versus HP Subordinate Service Selection Board. …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General, with Mr. J.K.Verma, Dy. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner is an applicant for selection to the post of TGT (Non Medical). She is a science graduate and she has passed B.Ed. She did her graduation with Chemistry Honours and the other subjects are Industrial Chemistry and Mathematics. It is the contention of the petitioner that going by the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, ruling the field at the relevant time, namely, the date of submission of the application and the date of written test and interview, the petitioner satisfied the qualification of graduation in Science. However, the notification stipulated that the candidate should have specified the subjects. According to the learned 2 counsel for the State, the only intention was to clarify the position in view of the requirement of teachers in specialized subjects. 2. We have held in our decision dated 29.4.2010 in Kamlesh Kumar vs. State of H.P. and anr, CWP No.3703 of 2009 along with connected matters that so long as the Rules governing the field required the qualification only of graduation in Science, the Selection Committee cannot improve the Rules and make their own amendments. We find that the petitioner in this case has come out successful in the written test and has also secured 150 marks in place of 143 marks for interview. 3. In the light of what is stated above, there will be a direction to the respondent to treat the petitioner as duly qualified and take further steps in the matter of selection of the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 20th May, 2010. (Justice Dev Darshan Sud), (tr) Judge. 4