Himachal Pradesh High Court
_______________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr on 1 September, 2025
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3845 of 2025 Reserved on: 28.08.2025 .
Date of Decision: 01.09.2025 _______________________________________________________ Ashish Sharma .......Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr.
... Respondents Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista & Mr. Shivom Vashista, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent-State.
Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate, for
respondent No. 2.
____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main reliefs:-
"a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioner directing the respondent No. 2 to consider the candidature of the petitioner in the recruitment process initiated on the basis of advertisement No. 36-3/2020 for the post of Junior Office Assistant (IT) against the posts of reserved for General Economically Weaker Section category and recommend the name 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 2
of the petitioner to the respondent number one for further appointment in the interest of justice."
2. Brief facts, necessary for adjudication of the case at .
hand, as emerge from the pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties are that respondent-State sent a requisition to respondent No. 2 for filling up 412 posts of Junior Office Assistant (IT), which subsequently came to be advertised under Post Code-727, vide Advertisement No. 34-2/2018 dated 19.12.2018 (Annexure P-1). Petitioner herein, being fully eligible, applied for the post in question along with other eligible candidates under General (Unserved) Category and his application form number was generated as 1989230.
3. Before afore advertisement could be taken to its logical end, Government of Himachal Pradesh issued instructions on 11.06.2019, vide Notification No.PER(AP)-C-B(12)-1/2019, thereby introducing 10% reservation for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in direct recruitment for Class-I, II, III and IV posts in State Government Services.
4. Pursuant to afore decision taken by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, recruitment process initiated, vide advertisement dated 19.12.2018 (Annexure P-1), came to be impacted. Department concerned amended Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 3 JOA (IT), as a result thereof, previously advertised posts were withdrawn by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission .
(in short "HPSSC"). Subsequently, new requisitions were sent to respondent No. 2 and previously advertised posts were clubbed together under Post Code-817 through Advertisement No. 36-3/2020 dated 21.09.2020 with closing date up to 25.10.2020 (Annexure P-2).
The last date was further extended upto 14.11.2020. Since the revised advertisement implemented 10% reservation for the EWS category, 261 posts were allocated to EWS candidates. Afore advertisement clearly provided that candidates, who had previously applied under Advertisement No. 34-2/2018, Post Code-727, were not required to reapply.
5. Though petitioner had already applied, pursuant to advertisement No. 34-2/2018, but pursuant to new advertisement No. 36-3/2020 dated 21.09.2020, he submitted fresh application under Post Code-817 and was allotted Application Form No.3310391 under the General (EWS) category. Petitioner was issued Roll No. 817012558, with his examination Centre at Government Senior Secondary School, Ghagus, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh.
Interestingly, the petitioner appeared in the written examination for the post of JOA (IT) under Post Code-817 using his earlier application No.1989230 (applied in Post Code-727) with Roll No.817001531, ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 4 which was applied by him under the General (UR) category, with the Centre at Government Senior Secondary School, Sunhani, District .
Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. On 14.08.2024, respondents declared the result with the cut-off marks for General (EWS) category at 49.43.
Since petitioner was not declared successful, he applied for information under Right to Information Act, wherein it came to be transpired that number of candidates, who had earlier applied under Advertisement No. 34-2/2018 dated 19.12.2018 (Annexure P-1) under General (UR) Category, were subsequently permitted to change their category to General (EWS) Category, but such benefit was not allowed to the petitioner. In the afore background, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for the reliefs, as have been reproduced hereinabove.
6. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceedings, respondents have filed reply, wherein facts, as have been noticed hereinabove, are not disputed, but an attempt has been made to refute the claim of the petitioner on the ground that since petitioner appeared for the post of JOA (IT) under Post Code-817 using his earlier application No.1989230 (applied in Post Code-727) with Roll No. 817001531, which was applied by him under General (UR) category, there was no occasion, if any, for the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner under General (EWS) ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 5 Category. While fairly admitting that in a few cases, prayer made on behalf of certain candidates for conversion of category from General .
(UR) to General (EWS) was accepted, it is submitted on behalf of respondent No. 2 that same was done subject to production of valid EWS Certificates existed as on the closing date of Online Recruitment Application and strictly before the written screening test was conducted. It is further submitted that since it was made clear in advertisement dated 21.09.2020 that candidates, who had applied previously under advertisement No. 34-2/2018 dated 19.12.2018 post Code 727, were not required to apply again, coupled with the fact that petitioner appeared for test of JOA (IT) under Post Code 817 using his earlier application with Roll No.81700153, which was allotted to him being a candidate of General (UR) Category, he rightly came to be considered in the category of General (UR), wherein he was unable to secure position in merit. It is further submitted that "important instructions for filling up Online Applications", contained in Advertisement, explicitly mentioned at Sr. No. 12 that:
"The category once claimed by the candidate(s) will not be allowed to be changed at any stage." It is further submitted that since the petitioner participated in the entire selection process, he is barred by the principle of estoppel from challenging it after being declared unsuccessful.::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 6
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
.
8. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Adarsh K.Vashista, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that since pursuant to advertisement dated 21.09.2020, petitioner had submitted fresh application under post code 817 under General (EWS) category, he could not have been considered under the category of General (UR). Mr. Adarsh Vashista, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that though petitioner had earlier, pursuant to Advertisement No. 34- 2/2018 dated 19.12.2018 under post code 727, applied under General (UR) Category, but since he had subsequently submitted fresh application for the post of JOA (IT) under post Code 817 under General EWS category, there was no occasion for the respondents to reject his candidature under afore category. He further submitted that though requests of as many as 17 candidates for a change of category were accepted by respondent No. 2, but for wholly unjustifiable reason such request made by the petitioner was not considered, as a result thereof, great prejudice has been caused to the petitioner, who would have definitely got selected in the event of consideration of his candidature under category of General (EWS), wherein cut off marks were 49.3.
::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 79. To the contrary, Mr. Vishwajeet, learned counsel representing respondent No. 2, supported the impugned action of .
respondents for not considering the candidature of the petitioner under General (EWS) Category. He submitted that at first instance, there was no occasion, if any, for the petitioner to apply afresh since he had already applied under Advertisement No.34-2/2018 dated 19.12.2018, Post Code-727 because in subsequent Advertisement No. 36-3/2020 dated 21.09.2020 Post Code-817 it was clearly stated that candidates, who have already applied, pursuant to previous advertisement, need not to apply again, but yet petitioner submitted fresh application, thereby submitting his candidature under the category of General (UR). He submitted that had petitioner, pursuant to his having submitted fresh application under Post Code-817, in response to advertisement No. 36-3/2020 dated 21.09.2020, appeared under the Roll No.817012558 with examination Centre at Government Senior Secondary School Ghagus, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, which was granted to him for the category of General (EWS), candidature of the petitioner would have been considered under the category of General (UR). But since he appeared for the written examination under the Roll number, which was allotted to him under the category of General (UR), no illegality ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 8 can be said to have been committed by the commission, while considering his candidature under the Category of General (UR).
.
10. Admittedly, in the case at hand, petitioner, prior to issuance of advertisement dated 21.09.2020 (Annexure P-2), had applied under Advertisement No. 34-2/2018, Post Code-727 in General (UR) Category. It is also not in dispute that earlier Advertisement No. 34-2/2018 dated 19.12.2018, Post Code-727 was withdrawn, on account of issuance of Notification dated 11.06.2019 issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, thereby introducing 10% reservation for the ESW category in direct recruitment for Class-
I, II, III and IV posts in State Government Services. While issuing fresh advertisement dated 21.09.2020 (Annexure P-2) for the post of JOA (IT), which was earlier advertised under Post Code-727 were clubbed together under Post Code-817 and pursuant to such advertisement, 261 posts were allotted to EWS category. Careful perusal of aforesaid advertisement clearly reveals that candidates, who had earlier applied under Advertisement No. 34-2/2018, post code 727, were not required to apply again.
11. Since in the case at hand, pursuant to earlier advertisement dated 19.12.2018 (Annexure P-1), petitioner had applied under General (UR) category and thereafter, vide advertisement dated 21.09.2020 (Annexure P-2), commission had ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 9 advertised 261 posts for General (ESW) category, petitioner had two options: firstly, he could have applied for change of category, .
pursuant to his having applied, in terms of advertisement dated 19.12.2018 (Annexure P-1) and secondly, he could applied fresh, in terms of advertisement dated 21.09.2020 (Annexure P-2). Though it has been stated on behalf of the petitioner that he had applied for change of category, which fact is evident from communication dated nil placed on record (Annexure P-6), but respondents, in their reply, while fairly admitting factum with regard to receipt of application, praying therein for change of category, have submitted that application filed by the petitioner for change of category was received by HPSSC after the declaration of written screening test, however, since petitioner produced an EWS Certificate dated 26.06.2021 in support of his request and such certificate was found to have been issued after the closing date of online recruitment application process i.e. 14.11.2020, his request was not considered. It is quite apparent from the reply filed by the respondent/commission that petitioner's request for the change of category, pursuant to his having filed application, in terms of advertisement No. 34-2/2018 dated 19.12.2018 (Annexure P-1), was made after declaration of result. If it is so, there was otherwise no occasion for the respondent-
commission to change the category of the petitioner at that stage, ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 10 rather for that purpose, petitioner ought to have filed application immediately after issuance of second advertisement dated .
21.09.2020 (Annexure P-2), whereby 261 posts of JOA(IT) under EWS category came to be advertised.
12. Moreover, this Court finds that at the time of making of application, as detailed hereinabove, petitioner produced an EWS Certificate dated 26.06.2021, which was found to have been issued after the closing date of online recruitment application process i.e. 14.11.2020. If it is so, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while rejecting the afore application of the petitioner. Interestingly, in the case at hand, entire confusion appears to have been created by the petitioner himself. Since petitioner had submitted application, pursuant to advertisement dated 19.12.2018 under Post Code-727 (Annexure P-1) and in subsequent advertisement dated 21.09.2020, whereby posts advertised, pursuant to earlier advertisement dated 19.12.2018, came to be clubbed together under Post Code-817, coupled with the fact that it stood specifically mentioned in second advertisement that candidates, who had already applied in terms of previous advertisement, were not required to reapply, there was no occasion, if any, for the petitioner to apply fresh under Post Code-817 in response to advertisement No. 36-3/2020 (Annexure P-2), rather petitioner immediately, after ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 11 issuance of second advertisement, ought to have applied for change of his category, in terms of his having applied against the post in .
question pursuant to previous advertisement.
13. Though in the case at hand, petitioner filed application for change of category, but after declaration of result. Moreover, petitioner though filed fresh application under Post Code-817 in response to advertisement No. 36-3/2020 under General (EWS) category, for which he was issued Roll No.817012558 with his examination Centre Government Senior Secondary School Ghagus, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, however, interestingly, petitioner appeared for the post of JOA (IT) under Post Code-817 using his earlier application No.1989230 (applied in Post Code-727) with Roll No.817001531, for which he had actually applied under General (UR) with the examination Centre at Government Senior Secondary School Suhani, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. Since the petitioner's having submitted fresh application under Post Code-817, in terms of second advertisement No. 36-3/2020 (Annexure P-2), he was allotted Roll No.817012558, with his examination Centre Government Senior Secondary School Ghagus, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, there was no occasion for him to appear for the post of JOA (IT) under Post Code-817 using his earlier application No. 1989230 that too with Roll No.817001531, which was admittedly allotted to him under the ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS 12 category of General (UR). Had petitioner appeared for the examination under Roll No.817012558 at examination Centre .
Government Senior Secondary School Ghagus, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, which was allotted to him, pursuant to his having made application, in response to advertisement No. 36-3/2020 (Annexure P-2) under General (EWS) category, he would have been considered under the category of General (EWS). Since petitioner failed to apply for change of category well within time and thereafter, he wrongly appeared for the post of JOA (IT) under his earlier application No.1989230 with Roll No.817001531, which was allotted to him being candidate of General (UR) category, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while considering his candidature under the category of General (UR).
14. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition fails and dismissed accordingly being devoid of merits. No order as to costs. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 01, 2025 (Sunil) ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2025 21:23:08 :::CIS