Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 18.3.2023, passed by the Director, Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, whereby an appeal under Rule 19 of the Part Time Multi Task Workers Policy, 2020, having been filed by the petitioner herein came to be dismissed, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to set-aside the aforesaid order.

2. Briefly stated facts as emerge from the record are that .

petitioner and respondent No.7 applied for post of Part Time Multi Task Workers at Government Primary School, Mahmla, Centre Chhiachhi, Tehsil Ramshehar, District Solan, H.P., alongwith other candidates. Though petitioner and respondent No.7 secured equal marks i.e. 30/38, but petitioner Sumna Devi was offered appointment of against the post in question. Respondent No.7 on account of his non-

Appellate Authority, petitioner was required to be removed from the post in question, but before action, if any, could be initiated against the petitioner, she filed an appeal before the Director, Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, under Rule 19 of the Part Time Multi Task Workers Policy, but same was also dismissed vide order dated 18.3.2023. It has been stated at the Bar that as of today, petitioner is still continuing against the post in question.

thereby showing his income to be less than 22,000/- was canceled by Tehsildar, Ramshahar District Solan, on 14.7.2022 and as such, Selection Committee, rightly denied the appointment to respondent No.7. Interestingly, in the case at hand, ADM Solan-cum-Appellate Authority took cognizance of the certificate allegedly issued in favour of of respondent No.7 by the Tehsildar on 16.7.2022, thereby showing his income to be less than Rs. 27,000/-, which otherwise now stands rt cancelled in terms of order dated 6.1.2023 (Annexure P-11). Since income of the candidate participating for selection to the post of Multi Task Worker was to be seen by the Selection Committee at the time of the date of interview, issuance of certificate thereafter, if any, thereby showing less income than the petitioner in favour of the respondent No.7, is/was of no consequence and as such, ADM Solan-cum-