IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.811 of 2009 Date of decision: 7.9.2010 ___________________________________________________ Mahender Kumar. ….. Petitioners Versus State of H.P & ors. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No. For the petitioner: Mr.V.D.Khidtta, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr.Rajesh Mandhotra, Deputy Advocate General for respondents-State. Mr.P.P.Chauhan, counsel for respondent No.4. ____________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) 1. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the grant of the following amongst other reliefs:- 1. That writ in the nature of certiorari may very kindly be issued and the result dated 3.11.2008 (Annexure P-6) may kindly be quashed and set aside and further the appointment of the respondent No.4 as Personal Assistant in the office of the Chairman, Zila Parishad, Shimla, District Shimla, may kindly be declared null and void by issuing the writ of mandamus. 2 2. That writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued directing the respondent No.3 to re- draw the result and give the appointment to the petitioner if he ultimately comes at Sr.No.1 of the selection/merit list. 2. Both the petitioner and the respondent No.4 appeared for the post of Personal Assistant to the Chaiman, Zila Parishad, Shimla in response to an advertisement issued on 28.6.2008. Interviews for the said post were held. The statement of marks awarded to the respondent No.4 and the petitioner reads as follows:- Result of the interview held on 3.11.2008 for the post of Personal Assistant in the office of Zila Parishad, Shimla, district, Shimla. Sr. No Full name and address of the candidate Name of the Employment exchange and registration No. or by applying directly Date of Birth Category Educational qualification 10th 10+2 Graduation Stenography Hindi English Typing Hindi English Exper -ience Personal Interview Total Marks 4. Smt. Brejehswari W/0 Sh. Mahender Singh,H.No. 196, Market Line, below Sabzi Mandi, Shimla Through direct application 16.11.73 General 14.75 1 1 7 N.A 5 3 1 4 36.75 5. Sh.Mohinder Kumar S/0 Sh. Lachhmi Dass, Tehsil Sunni, Distt. Shimla -do- 1.11.76 General 3rd 3 2 3 8 1 3 21.00 3 3. The case of the petitioner is that no marks were awarded to him for his matriculation examination. The stand of the respondents is that in fact, the petitioner had not produced the matriculation certificate and, therefore, he was not awarded any marks under this heading. The respondents No.1 to 3 have also clearly admitted that the respondent No.4 was wrongly awarded one mark under the heading of 10+2. She had passed 10+2 in the 3rd Division and she could not be awarded any marks under this heading. Therefore, the total marks awarded to the respondent No.4 would be 35.75. Without going into the dispute as to whether the matriculation certificate was produced by the petitioner or not, if his marks in matriculation are also taken into consideration then also he would only be entitled to 12.8 marks under this heading and the total marks awardable to him would be 33.8. Even then the petitioner would rank below to the respondent No.4. Therefore, there is no merit in the petition which is accordingly rejected. No order as to costs. September 7, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) (m) Judge 4