Himachal Pradesh High Court
Reena Devi vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others on 4 August, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.5357of 2022 Date of Decision:4. 08.2023 .
_______________________________________________________ Reena Devi .......Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others ... Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 of For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishal Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. rt B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.
_______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
By way of instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for following main relief:-
"(i) That the direction may be issued to respondents for allocating 8 marks to the petitioner under the head "Land Donated for School" in view of Clause-7 of the Part Time Multi Task Worker Policy 2020, in the interest of law and justice.
(ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to offer appointment to the petitioner for the post of Multi Task Worker in Government Primary School Laira, in R/o Block Elementary Education Office, Banjar, District Kullu, H.P. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:45:30 :::CIS 2
(iii) That the Selection list annexed herewith as Annexure P-
4 may kindly be quashed and set-aside for being vitiated."
2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been .
highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Vishal Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner is that despite there being provision in Clause-7 of Part Time Multi Task Worker Policy,2022, petitioner has been not provided 8 marks under the head of "Land of donated for School".
3. Learned Advocate General while inviting attention of this rt Court to Notification dated 25th August 2022, issued under the signature of Principal Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, states that now Appellate Authority stands constituted in terms of Rule 19 of Multi Task Worker Policy, wherein complaints, if any, with regard to procedure and non-adherence of the provision contained in the policy can be lodged.
4. Having carefully perused the aforesaid Notification, this Court sees no reason to decide the controversy, as taken note hereinabove, in the instant proceedings, rather same is required to be decided by Appellate Authority.
5. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of , reserving liberty to the petitioner to file appeal within a period of 15 days before the Appellate Authority, who shall decide ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:45:30 :::CIS 3 the same within a period of 15 days in accordance with law. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to both the parties.
.
Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma), of Judge August 4, 2023 (shankar) rt ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:45:30 :::CIS