DEVI SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER submitted an application for considering his candidature for appointment as Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Baag. Case of the Petitioner was favourably considered and recommended by the competent authority, which led to issuance of Annexure A -3 dated 12.4.2002. However, the Petitioner was not offered appointment and in the meantime process was initiated for filling up the post by issuing fresh advertisement dated 7.6.2002. Petitioner submitted an application and he was interviewed alongwith other candidates on 12.7.2002. Petitioner approached the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Tribunal seeking redressal of his grievance by way of O.A. No. 1539/2002. Case of the Petitioner, in a nutshell, was that he should be offered appointment on the basis of Annexure A -3 dated 12.4.2002 and that the post be not filled up on the basis of interview held on 12.7.2002. The Tribunal passed interim order in favour of the Petitioner on 31.7.2002. It is evident from Annexure A -7 that Deputy Director of Primary Education has informed the Block Primary Education Officer, Sundernagar -II that the Petitioner could not be offered appointment due to official mistake and the case be put up to the higher authorities for obtaining approval to appoint him as Part Time Water Carrier. However, surprisingly despite the interim order dated 31.7.2002, Respondent No. 4 was permitted to join his duties on 17.2.2003 pursuant to his selection on the basis of interview dated 12.7.2002. Petitioner on the basis of Annexure A -7 withdrew the original application on 3.11.2003 and the interim order dated 31.7.2002 was vacated. Respondent No. 3 has also taken up the case of the Petitioner with the Respondent No. 2 as per the pleadings on 12.12.2003 followed by reminder dated 23.12.2003.

(2.) MR . Lalit K. Sharma has strenuously argued that the action of Respondents No. 1 and 3 of not offering appointment to the Petitioner and initiating fresh selection process to the post of Part Time Water Carrier is illegal, arbitrary and thus violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. He then contended that Respondent No. 4 has been permitted to join his duties despite the stay order dated 31.7.2002 granted by the erstwhile Tribunal.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record carefully.