BABITA Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is maintained by the petitioner under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing the writ of certiorari, mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order or direction to the respondents.

(2.) Succinctly, the facts giving rise to the present petition, as per the petitioner, are that pursuant to interview held on 13.11.2014 by the School Management Committee/respondent (SMC), she was engaged as Drawing Master on and w.e.f. 15.11.2014. Surprisingly, she was asked verbally not to come on duty w.e.f. 01.03.2015. The petitioner has further contended that she is Plus Two and having Diploma in Arts and Crafts, thus she is fully eligible for the post of Drawing Master. She was initially engaged as Drawing Master by the SMC w.e.f. Aug., 2014, and she was being paid from collection made from the students. Subsequently, on 13.11.2014, SMC conducted interview for the post of Drawing Master on period basis qua GSSS, Badhalag, Solan, H.P., in which 12 out of 18 candidates participated. Merit list was drawn and the petitioner held first position and consequently she was issued an order of assignment on 14.11.2014. The petitioner joined her duties in the said school on 15.11.2014 and continued there till 28.02.2015, but till date no remuneration has been paid to the petitioner by the respondents. As per the petitioner, on 03.12.2014 fresh selection was conducted by the respondents, wherein also the petitioner, being meritorious, scored first rank out of 12 appearing candidates. However, to the utter surprise of the petitioner w.e.f. 01.03.2014 the Principal of the School verbally conveyed the petitioner not to come on duty. The respondents now intend to fill up the said vacancy through similar arrangement, which is wholly impermissible in law. Lastly, the petitioner, by way of filing the present writ petition, sought the following substantive reliefs:

(3.) Respondents No. 1 to 4, by filing reply to the petition, have resisted the claim of the petitioner. The replying respondents have contended that the petitioner was engaged as Drawing Master on period basis by the President of SMC on 14.1.2014 pursuant to interview conducted under the Chairmanship of S.D.M. Solan. The petitioner joined her duties on 15.11.2014, however permission so granted for filling up the said post was withdrawn by respondent No. 3 on 21.11.2014, as no criteria was approved by the Government for distribution of marks in the personal interview. The petitioner performed her duties from 15.11.2014 to 24.11.2014 and private respondent No. 5 has to pay qua that period. The replying respondents have denied that the petitioner worked w.e.f. 15.11.2014 to 28.02.2015. As per the replying respondents, the petitioner was not informed verbally not to come to School w.e.f. 01.03.2015, but on 24.11.2015 she noted the orders of respondent No. 4. Ultimately, the replying respondents prayed that the writ petition may be dismissed.