Himachal Pradesh High Court
Kuldeep Thakur vs Secretary Himachal Pradesh Rajya ... on 4 June, 2025
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
( 2025:HHC:17546 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.13366 of 2024 Decided on: 4th June, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Kuldeep Thakur ....Petitioner Versus Secretary Himachal Pradesh Rajya Chayan Ayog.
...Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting?
_________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Dinesh K. Thakur, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner's grievance relates to not awarding him marks by the respondent- Himachal Pradesh Rajya Chayan Ayog (Ayog in short) in lieu of his experience certificate.
2. Facts.
2(i) Respondent-Ayog issued an advertisement on 21.09.2020 inviting online recruitment applications for several categories of posts, including Post Code No.817- 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes
-2- ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) Junior Office Assistant Information Technology (JOA) (IT). Petitioner applied as General Category (UR) candidate for the post of JOA (IT). Clause-14 of the advertisement provided as under regarding evaluation criteria: -
"14. SCREENING TEST/ EXAMINATION/ EVALUATION ETC.:-
(i) In cases where the number of eligible candidates for recruitment to the post(s) advertised by the Commission is inordinately large, the Commission may limit/ shortlist the number of eligible candidates to be called for evaluation of 15 marks by subjecting them to a Written Screening Test which may be objective type or descriptive or both.
Final selection of a candidate will be made solely on the basis of the marks obtained in the Written Screening Test/ main subjective type test and his/her evaluation of 15 marks as per prescribed eriteria. If the candidates score egual marks, then a candidate who is senior in age will be placed above the candidate junior in age.
(ii) Where a skill test comprising of type and shorthand test or both is an Essential Qualification, the candidates will be required to undergo these tests for the prescribed speeds. Where a Physical Test is prescribed/required, the candidate will be required to undergo the required Physical Test as per Physical Standards laid down. The Commission shall not be liable for any injury or damage sustained by the candidates while going through such tests. However the skill tests/physical tests will be of qualifying nature.
-3- ( 2025:HHC:17546 )
iii) The provisional answer key of each Written
Screening Test (objective type) will be uploaded on the official website after the freezing of the answer sheets of the candidates for calling objections from the candidates. Seven day's time shall be given for inviting objections in the answer key, if any. The objections will be got vetted through an expert panel and the result will be finalized as per the revised answer key.
(iv) Any request for rechecking/re-evaluation of scripts of written tests/ Skill tests/Physical tests will not be entertained.
(v) The eligibility of candidate(s) called for the evaluation of 15 marks will be determined on the basis of original documents produced at the time of evaluation of 15 marks and the Commission will not be responsible if the candidature of any candidate is rejected at that stage or at the time of verification by the Appointing Authority. As such, admission to the Written Screening Test/Examination/ evaluation of 15 marks shall be purely provisional.
(vi) The Centers for holding the examination are liable to be changed at the discretion of the Commission. However, every effort will be made to allot the examinations centre(s) of their choice to the candidates. But, the Commission may, at its discretion, allot a different centre to a candidate if circumstances so warrant."
In terms of the aforesaid clause, 15 marks were kept for evaluation to be carried out on the basis of
-4- ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) documents of the candidates shortlisted for the purpose. Written/screening test was conducted for 85 marks for the post in question on 21.03.2021. Petitioner qualified in the said test. Skill type test was conducted by the respondent in different spells from 14.07.2021 to 22.06.2022. Petitioner qualified the skill test as well. .
2(ii) The result of the selection process was declared on 09.08.2024. Name of the petitioner was not there in the list of successful candidates. Waiting list panel was declared on 14.08.2024. Name of the petitioner figured therein at Sr. No.377, with total tally of marks at 53. As per the final result declared by the respondent for the post of JOA (IT), the cut-off marks for the General (UR) category were 55.46. From the result declared by the respondent of the waiting list panel, petitioner became aware of the fact that he was not awarded any mark for the experience certificate furnished by him.
With grievance that the petitioner has been wrongly denied 2.5 marks for experience certificate and with the assertion that in case these 2.5 marks are allowed to him, he would make it to the list of successful candidates,
-5- ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) petitioner has preferred this writ petition, seeking following substantive reliefs:-
"i. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued to the respondent, directing to allot 2.5. marks of the experience certificate as evaluated by commission with other documents in the evaluation process of August 2022 (annexure P/3) and then prepare the merit of JOA(IT) 817 post code.
ii. That the respondent commission may be directed till than notification dated 26.10.2024(Annexure P/15) & 18.11.2024 (Annexure P/16) may be kept in abeyance and no other notification pertaining to left out limited post may be issued further."
3. Under following order passed on 21.11.2024, the respondents were directed to keep one post of JOA (IT) in General (UR) category vacant. The post has accordingly been kept vacant by the respondent:-
"Notice. Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent.
2. The petitioner's name has not been reflected in the list of successful candidates in terms of the result declared and recommendation made by the respondent vide notifications at Annexure P-15 and Annexure P-16, against three posts of Junior Office Assistant (Information Technology)General Category (unreserved).
3.___Learned counsel for the petitioner inviting attention to the notification (Annexure P-15) submitted that cut-off marks for the General Category (unreserved) were 55.33. The respondents have shown the petitioner to have scored
-6- ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) 53 marks in all.
By referring to Evaluation Part of 15 marks (Annexure P-4), learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been awarded only 4.50 marks out of 15 marks and that he has not been awarded any marks for his experience certificate under Serial No. (xi). It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that 2.5 marks deserved to be given to the petitioner for his experience. The said column reads as under:
Sr. Detail of Criteria of 15 Max Submitted Accepted Marks Reason Remarks marks Marks Yes/No Yes/No Awarded for non No. acceptance xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx
xi) Experiance up to 2.5 Yes --- --- --- ---
maximum of 5 years in in Govt./Semi Govt.
Organisation relating
to the post applied for
(0.5 marks only for
each completed year)
Grand Total 15 4.50
4.____Further attention is invited to Page 55 of the paperbook, to the experience certificate given to the petitioner about his having worked as Developer in the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh through M/s. National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT), Shimla, on outsource basis w.e.f. 01.04.2017 to 20.07.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that post in question is that of Junior Office Assistant (IT) and the petitioner as Developer has experience of 5 years in terms of his experience certificate at Page 55, he is, therefore, entitled to 2.5 marks. In case, 2.5 marks are added to the tally of marks of the petitioner, his total marks would become 55.50 and thus, he would secure a place for appointment as Junior Office Assistant (IT).
-7- ( 2025:HHC:17546 )
_______The above factual submission demonstrates
existence of a, prima facie, case in favour of the petitioner as the petitioner has experience certificate of Developer at M/s. National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT), Shimla on outsource basis for a period of 5 years. Therefore, till the next date of hearing, respondents are directed to keep one post of Junior Office Assistant (IT) of General Category (unreserved) vacant.
Learned counsel for the respondent seeks time to file reply. Be filed within two weeks.
List on 09.12.2024.".
4. I have learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent as also Sh. Rahul Chopra, Deputy District Attorney, who has attended the hearing of the case pursuant to the order passed on 02.06.2025. 4(i) It is not in dispute that out of 15 marks kept by the respondents for evaluation, 2.5 marks were to be allowed for experience of candidates up to maximum of 5 years in Govt./Semi-Govt. organization relating to the post applied for (0.5 mark for each completed year) 4(ii) It is also not in dispute that petitioner had produced following experience certificate before the respondent-Ayog:-
" Experience Certificate HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA171001 Reference .HHC1( comp/ Tech./ MP/ Recruitment/ Phase-III) 2017- 120364
-8- ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) Dated 20.07.2022 It is certified that Sh. Kuldeep Singh Thakur, S/o Sh. Karam Singh Thakur, is serving in this office as Developer through M/s National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT), Shimla, on outsource basis with effect from 01.04.2017 to 20.07.2022 and Rs.31418 is his last drawn remuneration.
Dated 20.07.2022 Place Shimla Sd/-
(Hakikat Dhanda) Central Project Coordinator"
In terms of the above certificate, petitioner had rendered services in the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh as Developer through M/s National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT) Shimla on outsource basis with effect from 01.04.2017 to 20.07.2022. 4(iii) It is the case of the petitioner that in lieu of above experience certificate for a period of more than five years, he was entitled to 2.5 marks i.e. 0.5 mark for each completed year of service.
According to the respondent, petitioner's experience certificate does not qualify for grant of any marks under the evaluation criteria. The projected basis for such reasoning is the proceedings /minutes of meeting dated 21.11.2022 of the Committee formed by the respondent for evaluation of 15 marks especially the experience certificate
-9- ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) for the post of JOA (IT). The portion of the minutes of meeting highlighted by the respondent for not awarding any mark for petitioner's experience certificate, reads as under:-
"3. Prescribed criteria for marks in r/o Experience and Training:-
(a) Point No. I1 of Govt. Notification dated 17.04.2017 provides " Experience up to a maximum of five years in Govt./ Semi Govt. Organization relating to the post applied for (0.5 mark only for each completed year)=Total 2.5 marks.
(b) Point No. 10 of Govt. Notification dated 17.04.2017 provides " Training of at least 6 months duration related to post applied for from a recognized University/ Institution.= 01 marks Copies of notification dated 17.04.2017 and 18.07.2017 is enclosed at Annexure 'B' and Annexure 'C' pl.
(i) Findings of the Committee on Experience Certificates:-
a) The Nomenclature of the post is JOA (IT).
b) As per R&P Rules of the post of JOA(IT) has been classified as "Ministerial"
c) As per R&P Rules the Selection process provides the basis of merit of written test having 70% syllabus relating to Computer Science/ Computer Application/ Information Technology (IT)/ ITES Sectors/ Information Practices followed by Evaluation Skill test etc.
d) In the past while undertaking the work of Evaluation of 15 marks for the same post JOA(IT) in post code 556 the marks of experience were awarded to all working. experiences in Govt. offices on Ministerial /Professional/ teaching/technical posts)
- 10 - ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) Accordingly all the experience related certificate of the candidates were checked by the Committee and all the members were of an anonymous view that:-
1. The experience certificates of working in Govt./ semi Govt. Offices on the posts which are of Clerical/ministerial nature/ professional nature/ (technical natures faculty etc. relating to the post may be considered for award of marks for the post of JOA (IT) post code-817 also. These posts include:- JOA(IT), Clerk, Computer (Operators, Data Entry Operators, Store keepers, Data Processing Assistant, Naib Nazir, Statistical Assistant, Technical Sport Person-cum- Data Entry Operator, MIS Office Assistant, Library Assistant-
cum-Data Entry Operator, Lab Assistant (IT), System Assistants, Aadhar Operators, Investigator-cum-Data Entry Operator, Steno Typists, Faculty/ Teachers/ Trainers IT & ITES, Programmers/ Assistant Programmers, System Officers, Research Assistants/ Associates (IT), Assistant Block Coordinators, Project support Executives, Field Assistants (IT), Senior Officers IT, Network Engineers. Further the experience certificates of working which have been issued by the Govt, offices where they worked may be considered and the certificates issued by the outsourcing private agencies/ societies may not be considered as per past practice in the Commission. If approved the Commission may decide to provide an opportunity for submission of experience certificates from Govt. Officers to such candidates who have worked in Govt. offices but provided certificates of experience from outsourcing agencies."
- 11 - ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) According to learned counsel for the respondent, it is only the experience of working in Govt./ semi Govt. Offices on the posts which are of Clerical/ministerial nature relating to the post that can be considered for award of marks for the post of JOA(IT) . That such posts include JOA (IT), Clerk, Computer Operator, Data Entry Operator, Store keeper, Data Processing Assistant, Naib Nazir, Statistical Assistant, Technical Support person-cum- Data Entry Operator, MIS Office Assistant, Library Assistant-cum Data Entry Operator, Lab Assistant (IT), System Assistants, Aadhar Operators, Investigator-cum-Data Entry Operator, Steno Typists, Faculty/Teachers/ Trainers IT & ITES, Programmers/Assistant Programmers, System Officers, Research Assistants/Associates (IT), Assistant Block Coordinators, Project Support Executives, Field Assistants (IT), Senior Officers IT, Network Engineers. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that, it is only the experience in manning the above referred posts that would be eligible for award of 0.5 mark per year of the experience, since the petitioner's experience is that of Developer, the said experience does not qualify for granting marks.
- 12 - ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) 4(iv) In my considered view, the reasoning given by the respondent for not awarding marks for experience certificate of the petitioner issued to him as a Developer is absolutely misplaced. When the committee constituted by
the respondent for evaluation of 15 marks criteria has itself taken a decision in its meeting convened on 21.11.2022 to take into consideration the experience certificates of those in Government or Semi Government offices on the post which are not only of Clerical/Ministerial in nature but also of professional and technical nature, then there lies no grain of substance in the stand of the respondent for discarding the experience certificate of the petitioner obtained by him as Developer for the purpose of awarding marks to him under the evaluation criteria. Clause 3 of the minutes extracted above shows that the categories of post, for which the experience has been held to be countable, have been included therein by example, there is no exclusion clause therein.
Furthermore, when the experience gained against the posts which are professional/technical in nature has been permitted to be counted for award of 2.5 marks; when the experience gained against the post of
- 13 - ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) Programmers/Assistant Programmers/System Officers/ Research Assistants/Associates IT, Associate Block Coordinators, Project support Executives, Field Assistant (IT), Senior officer (IT) and Network Engineers etc. is being considered valid for awarding marks for experience, then there is no reason for discarding the experience obtained by the petitioner as a Developer. It is not the stand of the respondent that a Developer was ineligible to apply for the post in question. The reasoning accorded by the respondents to justify denying marks for petitioner's experience certificate defies even common sense logic. The post of the Developer is also professional/ technical in nature. The experience gained by the petitioner as a Developer falls within the parameters laid down in the minutes of meeting dated 21.11.2022 convened by the Committee constituted by the respondent for award of marks for the experience certificate.
5. In view of above, this writ petition is allowed. Respondent is directed to consider the experience certificate of the petitioner as a valid certificate for award of evaluation marks in view of the parameters laid down by the Committee on 21.11.2022. Further necessary consequential action based
- 14 - ( 2025:HHC:17546 ) thereupon be completed within two weeks from today.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand dispose of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge June 4, 2025 R.Atal