Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Kulveer Singh vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation on 27 December, 2022

Bench: Sabina, Sushil Kukreja

                                                  1




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                     CWPOA No.3534 of 2020
                                     Date of decision : 27TH December, 2022




                                                                            .

    Kulveer Singh                                                            ...... Petitioner

                                     Versus





    Himachal Road Transport Corporation                                ......Respondents
    Coram:
    The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge.





    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1

    For the Petitioner         :     Mr. Anil Kumar Manget, Advocate.
    For the Respondents :
                             r       Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate.

    Sabina, Judge (oral)

Petitioner has filed original application before learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, seeking for the following substantive relief(s):-

"i) That respondent be directed to disclose the marks to the applicant so obtained by him in the written test and the respondent may further be directed to produce copy of the answer sheet before this Hon'ble Court and also to supply copy of answer sheet to the applicant.

ii) That action of the respondent to erroneously evaluate the answer sheet of the applicant be quashed and set aside and respondent be directed to evaluate the answer sheet of the applicant properly and if he found meritorious he may be selected for the said post".

2. After the abolition of the Tribunal, the original application was transferred to this Court.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

4. The case of the petitioner was that he had applied for .

recruitment to the post of Transport Multipurpose Assistant and has done well in the written test held on 17th September, 2017. Petitioner was expecting to secure more than 75 marks in the written examination, whereas, the last person in the General Category, who had qualified the written examination, had secured about 65 marks.

5. However, as per the reply filed by the respondents, the last person in General Category, who had been called for evaluation of documents, had secured 75 marks, whereas, the petitioner, who had taken the examination under Roll No. 140422 had secured 65 marks out of 85 marks.

6. Since as per reply filed by the respondents, petitioner had secured less marks then the last person who had been called for evaluation of documents in the General Category, therefore, no ground for interference is made out.

7. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

( Sabina ) Judge ( Sushil Kukreja) Judge December 27, 2022 (tarun) ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2022 20:32:02 :::CIS