Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWPOA/12306/2008 on 29 December 2011
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
CWP(T) No. 12306 of 2008.
Decided on: 29th December, 2010. Sarwan Kumar. …Petitioner.
-Versus- State of H. P. and Others.
…Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 to 3.
: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Deputy
Advocate General with Mr. R.P.
Singh, Assistant Advocate
General.
None for respondent No. 4.
For respondent No. 5. : Ms. Meena Thakur, Advocate vice
Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral):
Petitioner has assailed the appointment of respondent No. 5 to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. According to him, the respondent No. 4 was not associated as Member of the selection committee. It has come in the reply that the Pradhan Gram Panchayat Majra was informed by the Block Primary Education Officer, Gagret-I vide letter dated 01.08.2005 to attend the interview at 10:00 A.M. at Rest House Gagret. Despite that, the respondent No. 4 has not come forward to be a Member of the selection committee. However, no rejoinder has been filed to the same. Moreover, the petitioner has secured 43.87 marks, whereas respondent No. 5 has secured 48.0 marks. Once the suitability of the petitioner and respondent No. 5 has been adjudged by a duly constituted selection committee, this Court will not sit in appeal 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. High Court of H.P. 2010:HHC:13057 ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 12:09:41 :::CIS
over the recommendations made the duly constituted Selection Committee.
2. Accordingly, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. No costs.
(Rajiv Sharma)
Judge November 29, 2010. (bhupender)
High Court of H.P. 2010:HHC:13057 ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 12:09:41 :::CIS
High Court of H.P. 2010:HHC:13057 ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 12:09:41 :::CIS