RAVINDER NATH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Additional Advocate General has handed over instructions dtd. 1/9/2022, imparted by Secretary, Himachal Pradesh Academy of Arts Culture and Languages, Shimla. These instructions are ordered to be taken on record. By way of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition are that the petitioner was appointed as a Computer Instructor in the respondent-Academy in terms of the interviews, which were held by the competent authority pursuant to the advertisement issued in this regard in terms of order dtd. 25/10/1999 (Annexure P-1). He continues to be serving till date against the said post on contract basis.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued thatleaving other issues aside, a perusal of Annexure P-2 would demonstrate that in the meeting of the Executive Committee of Himachal Academy of Arts Culture and Languages, dtd. 14/1/2009 (Annexure P-2), in which besides other members, Secretary (Finance) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh was also present, a decision was taken in the affirmative to fill the posts of Research Assistant, Clerk and Peon. Learned Senior Counsel, thereafter, by referring to the documents appended with the rejoinder which are the Notings obtained under Right to Information Act, has submitted that a perusal of Note-73 onwards (See Page-48 of the Paper Book) would demonstrate that the case of appointing the petitioner against the post of Clerk was duly recommend by the respondent-Academy to the Worthy Chief Minister. Notes-74 and 75 as per the learned Senior Counsel demonstrate that Worthy Chief Minister was pleased to give his approval for appointing the petitioner against said post of Clerk. Thereafter, by referring to Note-76, she submitted that a perusal of this Note would demonstrate that after necessary approval was granted by the then Chief Minister for appointment of petitioner against the post of Clerk, it was mentioned in this Note that letter of appointment against the post be issued in favour of the petitioner. However, the proposal was not taken to its logical conclusion on account of Note-78, wherein it was proposed that the proposal be sent to the Finance Department, to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, ignoring the fact that the Secretary (Finance) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh was a member of the Executive Committee, which had approved the filling up of the posts of Clerk. In these circumstances, learned Senior Counsel submitted that taking into consideration the peculiar facts of this case wherein the petitioner is serving the respondentAcademy on contract basis since the year 1999, a mandamus be issued to the respondents to appoint the petitioner against the post of Clerk so that justice is done to him. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that at the time when the petitioner joined the service of the respondent-Academy, he was of twenty nine years old. Today, he is fifty two years old and in case the petitioner is not accommodated, he will not get any Government job as he has already become over age. Therefore, in this background, learned Senior Counsel submitted that taking into consideration the peculiarity of the case, the petition be allowed and the respondents be directed to appoint the petitioner against the post of Clerk with all consequential benefits.