KRISHAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No.2 vide Annexure A-1 issued on 13.9.2005, invited applications from the aspirants concerned for filling up 63 posts of Patwaris. One amongst 63 posts, as become notified in Annexure A-1, as, appertaining to General Physically Handicapped candidate (General), became applied for, by the writ petitioner.

(2.) In the R&P Rules, as were existing in contemporaneity to the issuance of Annexure A-1, no contemplations hence exist qua the aspirants concerned, being appointed on a contractual basis. Moreover, the afore factum is also evident from a perusal of Annexure A-1.

(3.) Consequently, though the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, makes a contention before this Court, that any deviation therefrom, inasmuch as from Annexure A-1, by the respondents, through, rather theirs appointing the writ petitioner, on a contractual basis, does flout, the mandate of the R & P Rules prevalent in 2005, as also breaches the afore stated enunciation, borne in Annexure A-1. Hence, he strives for granting of the writ relief.