NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRINCIPAL Secretary (Elementary Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh sent a communication to the Director, Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh on 13.6.2008 for initiating process for conducting common entrance test for admission to two years J.B.T. course/session 2008 -2010. In sequel thereto, Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education issued advertisement vide Annexure P -4 for holding common entrance test for admission to two years J.B.T. course. The last date of receipt of application was 21.7.2008. It will be apt to refer to condition No. 5 incorporated in the advertisement, which reads thus: 5. Neither the appearance in the test shall ipso facto entitle a candidate to get admission in this course nor the JBT training guarantees Govt. service after the completion of training.

(2.) THEREAFTER , written test was held and the Petitioners qualified the same and started pursuing two years J.B.T. course. Petitioners have also placed on record admission notice Annexure P -2 issued in the year 2003 whereby condition No. 5, as quoted hereinabove from Annexure P -4, was also existing. Petitioners have also placed on record copy of advertisement for the academic session 2010. Conditions No. 6 and 7 read thus: 6. Since contractual appointment will be considered after passing of JBT course and subject to permission to filll up vacancies, hence, no bond will be executed to serve in the Education Department. 7. After successful completion of JBT course as above conditions, the candidates are eligible for employment against vacant posts of JBT teacher in Elementary Education Department. Actual appointment will be based on vacancies and necessary approvals to fill the posts. As per present policy fresh appointments are being made on contract.

(3.) MR . R.P. Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General has vehemently argued that the present petition is not maintainable since the examination is over and the Petitioners have no accrued or vested right to be appointed on regular basis. According to him, the posts of J.B.T. teachers are to be filled up as per Recruitment and Promotion Rules and the case of the Petitioners can only be considered in accordance with law for contractual appointment on the basis of policy decision taken by the State. He then contended that in the matter of policy decision the scope of judicial review is very limited. He lastly contended that as far as 2008 -2010 batch is concerned, no bond was got executed from the students.