Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 5-State.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner has not been successful in her challenge to the selection and appointment of respondent No.6 as Part-Time Multi Task Worker at Government Primary School (GPS) Manthla, Education Block Saigloo, District Mandi. Hence, the writ petition.

2. Factual matrix:-

2(i). Respondents conducted a selection process for engagement of a Part-Time Multi Task Worker at GPS Manthla on 10.06.2022. Petitioner, respondent No.6 and Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2025:HHC:6336 several other candidates participated in the selection process. Respondent No.6 emerged successful. She was accordingly appointed as Part-Time Multi Task Worker in the aforesaid school.

2(ii). Petitioner filed an appeal on 30.12.2022 under Rule 19 of the Part-Time Multi Task Worker Policy (in short 'PTMTW Policy') against the selection of respondent No.6. Her bone of contention was that respondent No.6 had procured a Below Poverty Line (BPL) certificate by practicing fraud. She had concealed her actual income. That respondent No.6 had been wrongly awarded 03 marks for belonging to BPL family. These 03 marks were required to be taken out from the total tally of 28 marks awarded to respondent No.6. In case this is done, then the petitioner, who has been awarded 25 marks, would be selected. 2(iii). The Additional District Magistrate, Mandi, acting as appellate authority, dismissed petitioner's appeal on 21.03.2024. While dismissing the appeal, it was noticed that :- (a) Liberty was granted to the petitioner to challenge respondent No.6's BPL certificate by way of appeal. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar enquired into the matter and accordingly submitted his report on 11.07.2023. This report was not challenged by the affected parties. The 2025:HHC:6336 appeal was heard on the request of learned counsel on both sides, who prayed for proceeding directly for argument on the main appeal; (b) The allegation of the petitioner that 03 marks have been awarded to respondent No.6 in view of her BPL certificate was found to be false. Respondent No.6 was not allotted any marks in lieu of her BPL certificate;

3(iv). Learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record instructions memo dated 05.03.2025 from the Director Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, reiterating the stand of the respondents as taken before the authorities below.

4. The contentions of the petitioner are not borne out from the record.

4(i). The petitioner has annexed the final panel drawn for the recruitment process to the post of Part-Time Multi Task Worker in GPS Manthla, Education Block Saigloo, District Mandi as Annexure P-12 with the writ petition. It is clearly evident from the aforesaid document that respondent No.6 has not been allotted any marks under the BPL category. Therefore, first contention of the petitioner lacks merit. No error has been committed by the authorities below in this regard.