Himachal Pradesh High Court
The State Of H.P vs Meenakshi on 13 August, 2021
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Satyen Vaidya
1
REPORTABLE/NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
.
ON THE 13th DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN,
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3238 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3466 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3467 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3468 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3905 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3908 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3911 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3913 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3914 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3915 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3921 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3922 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3927 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3932 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3933 OF 2019
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1423 OF 2020
CIVIL WRIT PETITION (ORIGINAL APPLICATION) NO. 5998 OF 2020
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3476 OF 2021
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3238 OF 2019
Between:-
1. THE STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HP, SHIMLA-2, HP.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
2
HEALTH SERVICES
HP, SHIMLA-9. ....PETITIONERS
.
(BY SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. GAYATRI DEVI
D/O SH. UMA KANT,
R/O VILL. DHARJAROL,
P.O. JAROL, TEHSIL THUNAG,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
2. ANKITA
D/O SH. KULDEEP CHAND
R/O NEAR DAV COLLEGE,
WARD NO.8
TEHSIL & DISTT. KANGRA, H.P.
3. DIPIKA CHAUHAN
D/O SH. SURESH KUMAR
R/O V.P.O. HANOH,
TEHSIL BHORANJ, DISTT. HAMIRPUR, H.P.
4. POONAM
D/O SH. HEM RAJ,
R/O VPO MAHADEV,
TEHSIL SUNDERNAGAR,
DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
5. RUPALI DOGRA
D/O SH. OMPAL DOGRA,
R/O VPO BEEHAN BIHAN UPARLI,
TEHSIL DEHRA, DISTT. KANGRA, H.P.
6. MEENA KUMARI
D/O SH. RAMESH CHAND,
R/O VILL. MIHARA, P.O. MARHANA,
TEHSIL GHUMARWIN,
DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P. ..RESPONDENTS
(SH. YOGESH KUMAR CHANDEL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO 5
SH. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-7)
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
3
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3466 OF 2019
.1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY (HEALTH) TO THE
.
GOVERNMENT OF HP, SHIMLA-2, H.P.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES, H.P. SHIMLA-9
.... PETITIONER
(BY SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
VERSUS
1. MEENAKSHI
D/O SH.VEER SINGH,
R/O VILL. BHERI, P.O. BANDI,
TEHSIL KANGRA, BHERI (320),
DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
2. ANJNA KUMAR
D/O SH. KIKAR SINGH,
RESIDENT OF VILL. ALHI,
P.O. NALOH, TEHSIL SIHUNTA,
DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.
...RESPONDENTS
.3. H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
. HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(SH. NARESH KAUL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1
MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3467 OF 2019
Between:-
1. THE STATE OF HP THROUGH ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HP, SHIMLA-2, HP.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES HP, SHIMLA-9. .......PETITIONERS
(BY SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. MANISHA PAL
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
4
W/O SH. JITENDER KUMAR
R/O VILL. & P.O. KAPAHRA,
TEHSIL GHUMARWIN DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P.
........RESPONDENTS
.
2. HP STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
..PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(MR. RAKESH KUMAR DOGRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1
MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3468 OF 2019
.1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH
. ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
. TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HP, SHIMLA-2, H.P.
.
.2 THE DIRECTOR,
. HEALTH SERVICES, H.P.
. SHIMLA-9
.... PETITIONERS
(BY SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. KAVITA SHARMA,
D/O SH. DARSHAN KUMAR,
R/O VILL. THER, P.O. KUKHER,
TEHSIL NURPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
...RESPONDENT
2. H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(SH. NARESH KAUL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1
MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3905 OF 2019
Between:-
1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH
ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF H.P, SHIMLA HP
2. THE DIRECTOR,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
5
HEALTH SERVICES HP, SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(BY MR. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
.
AND
1. HEMA DEVI
D/O SH. AMAR CHAND
W/O SH. ARUN SEN,
R/O VILLAGE & PO GUTKAR,
TEHSIL SADAR, DISTRICT MANDI,
H.P.
2. NISHA DEVI
D/O SH. YOG RAJ,
R/O VILLAGE KARLWHAN,
PO BHARGAON, DISTRICT
MANDI, HP, PIN CODE
175003.
3. TRIPTI THAKUR
D/O SH. PREM SINGH,
R/O VILLAGE & PO DRAHAL,
TEHSIL JOGINDER NAGAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
4. REETA DEVI
D/O SH. PRAKASH CHAND,
R/O VILLAGE & PO SAMRAHAN, TEHSIL KOTLI,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P. PIN CODE
175 003.
5. JAI PREETI SHARMA
D/O SH. SHER CHAND SHARMA,
R/O VILLAGE & PO BALOH, TEHSIL SADAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, HP, PIN CODE 175002
....RESPONDENTS
(SH. SURINDER PRAKASH SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR 1, 3 & 5
MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-6)
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
6
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3908 OF 2012
Between :
.
.1. THE STATE OF H.P.
. THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY(HEALTH) TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF HP, SHIMLA-2, H.P.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES H.P. SHIMLA-9
...PETITIONERS
(BY MR. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. POONAM
D/O SH. MAN SINGH,
R/O VPO KALAHOD,
TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
2. BHARTI THAKUR
D/O SH. ROOP LAL DADWAL,
R/O VPO MATOKHAR,
TEHSIL SARKAGHAT, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
3. SEEMA KUMARI
D/O SH. JASPAL SINGH,
R/O VPO THANA, P.O. GOPALPUR,
TEHSIL SARKAGHAT, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
...RESPONDENTS
.4. H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
. HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(SH. YOGESH KUMAR CHANDEL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3
MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 3911 of 2019
Between:
1. STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
7
SHIMLA-2.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
.
HEALTH SERVICES, H.P. SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. DEEPIKA
D/O SH. SOHAN SINGH
R/O VILLAGE MARI, POST OFFICE, DHURKHARI,
TEHSIL BALDWARA, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
2. SHASHI KUMARI
D/O SH. PRATAP SINGH,
R/O VILLAGE LUHARD POST OFFICE, BHARGAON,
TEHSIL KOTLI, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
3. VARSHA KUMARI
D/O SH. INDER SINGH,
R/O VILLAGE BHOUR, POST OFFICE, KANAID,
TEHSIL SUNDERNAGAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS.
4. H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION, HAMIRPUR,
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
..PROFORMA RESPONDENT.
(SH. DEVENDER K. SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO 3.
SH. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-4)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3913 OF 2019
Between:
1. THE STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA-2.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES, H.P. SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
8
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
.
AND
1. VARSHA BHANDARI
D/O SH. BELI RAM,
R/O VILL. BHALTHER,
P.O. PANARSA, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
2. RAKSHA DEVI
D/O SH. PARMA NAND, R/O TYPE-2
QTR. NO. 201, BSNL COLONY ROPA,
P.O. BHOJPUR, TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
3. NIRMLA KUMARI
W/O SH. ANOOP,
R/O H. NO. 20/8 VILL. ROPA,
P.O. BHOJPUR, TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
4. GUMATI DEVI
W/O SH. THAKUR DASS,
R/O VPO BLAT, TEHSIL BALH,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
5. SEEMA DEVI
W/O SH. PRAVEEN,
R/O VILLAGE SILIKHAD, P.O. KUFRI,
TEHSIL PADHAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
6. PUJA DEVI
D/O SH. NAND LAL SAINI,
R/O HOUSE NO. 366/5, SAIN MUHALLA,
P.O. MANDI, TEHSIL SADAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
7. VANDANA
D/O SH. HARI OM, R/O WARD NO.7,
HOUSE NO. 38, VPO MEHATPUR,
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT UNA, H.P.
8. SHANTA KUMARI
W/O SH. RAHUL PATIAL,
R/O VPO NABAHI, (GORI GHULANU),
TEHSIL SARKAGHAT, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
9
9. RENU CHANDEL
W/O SH. SURENDER KUMAR,
.
R/O VILL. BHATER, P.O. TARKWARI,
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.
10. NISHA KUMARI
D/O SH. RANJEET SINGH,
R/O VPO DHIRWIN, PAINJWIN,
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.
11. DEEPIKA
D/O SH. JAGDISH CHAND,
R/O VILLAGE BHOL KHAS, P.O. LARTH,
TEHSIL JAWALI, DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
12. CHANDNI KUMARI
D/O SH. SRI KANTH,
R/O VPO BALDHAR,
TEHSIL NAGROTA BAGWAN,
DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
13. JYOTI
D/O SH. SHANKAR DASS,
R/O VILLAGE PATTA, P.O. UPPERLI BAHLI,
TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
14. SUNITA DEVI
W/O SH. TARA CHAND,
R/O VPO BATH, TEHSIL BALH,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
15. BIMLA DEVI
D/O SH. RAM NATH,
R/O VPO GOHAR, TEHSIL CHACHYOT,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
16. ANJALI THAKUR
D/O SH. PARKASH THAKUR,
R/O VPO PANDOH, TEHSIL SADAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
17. HIMANSHU
D/O SH. HEM CHAND,
R/O VILLAGE NASLOH, P.O. REHARDHAR,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
10
TEHSIL SADAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
18. LATA DEVI
.
W/O SH. BHUMESH CHAND,
R/O VILLAGE MAGLANA, P.O.KUFRI,
TEHSIL PADHAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
...RESPONDENTS.
19. H.P.STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
..PROFORMA RESPONDENT.
(SH. YOGESH KUMAR CHANDEL, ADVOCATE FOR R 1 TO 18.
SH. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-19.)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION. 3914 OF 2019
Between:
1. THE STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-2.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES, H.P.
SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. PRATIBHA THAKUR
D/O SH. BHAG CHAND THAKUR,
R/O WARD NO. 3, VILLAGE KAPRI,
P.O. DHARA, TEHSIL BHUNTER,
DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.
2. BHANU PRIYA
D/O SH. TARA CHAND
AND WIFE OF SH. PYARE LAL,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
11
R/O VILLAGE RATOCHA, P.O. DHARA,
TEHSIL BHUNTER, DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS.
.
3. H.P.STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT.
(SH. SURENDER PRAKASH SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR R 1 & 2.
SH. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-3.)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3915 OF 2019
Between:
1. THE STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA-2.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES, H.P. SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. RENU BALA
D/O SH. HANS RAJ,
R/O VILLAGE GHAMEERPUR,
P.O. NANDPUR, TEHSIL DEHRA,
DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
2. KIRNA DEVI
D/O SH. HARI RAM,
R/O VILL. BHON KATLI,
P.O. KALAHOD, TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR,
DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
3. VEENA KUMARI
D/O SH. BHAGAT RAM,
R/O VPO MAHADEV, TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
12
4. PRIYANKA KUMARI
D/O SH. MILKHI RAM,
R/O VILLAGE PUNDER, P.O. DAIN,
.
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT HAMIRPUR.
....RESPONDENTS.
5. H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT.
(SH. YOGESH KUMAR CHANDEL, ADVOCATE FOR R 1 TO 4.
SH. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-5.)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3921 OF 2019
Between:
1. THE STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA-2.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES, H.P.
SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. AMRITANJALI
D/O SH. CHAMAN LAL SHARMA,
R/O WARD NO.2, P.O. JOGINDER NAGAR,
TEHSIL J. NAGAR, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
2. SANTOSH KUMARI
D/O SH. PURAN CHAND,
R/O ADDRESS VILLAGE LAHAR BANSDEHRA,
P.O. DUGHA, TEHSIL AND DISTT. HAMIRPUR, H.P.
3. KAMNA DEVI
D/O SH. SWAROOP CHAND,
R/O VILLAGE SAINTHAL, P.O. SAINTHAL,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
13
TEHSIL AND DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
4. MEENA DEVI
.
D/O SH. PARAS RAM,
R/O VILLAGE KUTNASS, P.O. KATWACHI,
TEHSIL NIHRI, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
5. TANUJA
D/O SH. VIRENDER SINGH,
R/O VILLAGE GARADE, P.O. AND
TEHSIL NICHAR, DISTT. KINNAUR, H.P.
6. NISHA KUMARI
D/O SH. CHET RAM,
R/O VILLAGE SADEHARA, P.O. SIDHYANI,
TEHSIL BALH, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
7. GEETA DEVI
W/O SH. GOPAL,
R/O VILLAGE SAMKAL, P.O. UPPER BEHLI,
TEHSIL SUNDERNAGAR, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
8. RUPA,
D/O SH. SUNDER LAL
R/O VILLAGE DOUNDHI, P.O. NAGCHALA,
TEHSIL BALH, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
9. PREETIKA
D/O SH. RAMESH KUMAR,
R/O VPO SLAPPER COLONY, TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR,
DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS
10. H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(SH. YOGESH KUMAR CHANDEL, ADVOCATE, FOR R-1,2, 4 TO
7, SH. PAWAN K. SHARMA, ADVOCATE, FOR R-9 AND
SH. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-10)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3922 OF 2019
Between:
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
14
1. THE STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
.
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA-2.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES, H.P.
SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
SHALINI THAKUR
D/O SH. SANOKH SINGH THAKUR,
R/O VILLAGE POLI, P.O. THURAN,
TEHSIL JHANDUTTA,
DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P.
....RESPONDENT.
H.P.STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT.
(SH. RAKESH KUMAR DOGRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1,
SH. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3927 OF 2012
Between:
.1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY(HEALTH) TO THE GOVERNMENT
OF HP, SHIMLA-2, H.P.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES H.P.
SHIMLA-9
...PETITIONERS
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
15
AND
1. SAPNA KUMARI
D/O SH. ROSHAN LAL,
.
R/O VILL. PANJAIL KALLAN, TEHSIL
SADAR PANJEL KALAN (2)),
DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P.
2. NITIKA SHARMA
D/O SH. SHYAM LAL
R/O VILLAGE BALWAR, P.O. JUKHALA
TEHSIL SADAR, DISTT. BILASPUR, H.P.
3. SMRITI DEVI
D/O SH. SATYA PAL,
R/O VPO SAYAR DOBHA, TEHSIL SADAR
DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P.
...RESPONDENTS
.4. H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
. HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(SH. SURENDER VERMA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3
MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3932 OF 2019
Between:-
1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH
ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF H.P-2 SHIMLA HP
2. THE DIRECTOR, HEALTH SERVICES HP,
SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(BY MR. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. SARITA KUMARI
D/O SH. JAI CHAND,
ADDRESS VILLAGE BHOUR,
PO KANAID, TEHSIL
SUNDERNAGAR, DISTRICT
MANDI H.P.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
16
2. H.P. STATE STAFF
SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
.
....RESPONDENTS
( SH. YOGESH KUMAR CHANDEL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1
AND MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3933 OF 2019
Between:-
1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH
ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF H.P-2 SHIMLA HP
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES HP,
SHIMLA-9.
.....PETITIONERS
(BY MR. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. NEHA SHARMA
D/O SH. HANS RAJ SHARMA,
R/O VILLAGE THAMBA,
PO DURGELLA, TEHSIL
SHAHPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA,
H.P.
2. PREETI MOGU
W/O SH. VIKRAM SINGH,
R/O VPO REHLU, TEHSIL
SHAHPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
3. NIDHI SHARMA
D/O SH. MADAN LAL SHARMA
R/O VPO NAGROTA SURIAN
TEHSIL JAWALI, DISTRICT KANGRA,
H.P.
4. PRIYA CHAUDHARY
D/O SH. RAJESH KUMAR
R/O VPO RAJIANA, TEHSIL
NAGROTA BHAGWAN,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
17
DISTRICT KANGRA,
H.P.
5. NEHA CHAUDHARY
.
W/O SH. VIKAS BAHRI
(D/O BHAGWANT SINGH)
R/O VILL. SUNEHAR,
P.O. JAWALI, TEHSIL JAWALI, DISTRICT,
KANGRA, H.P.
6. NANDNI
W/O SH. VANEET KUMAR
(D/O SH. JARM SINGH)
R/O VPO CHARI,
TEHSIL SHAHPUR, DISTRICT
KANGRA, H.P.
7. AMRITA
W/O SH. RAVI KUMAR
R/O VILLAGE HATLI BALLA,
PO DRAMAN, TEHSIL SIHUNTA,
DISTRICT
CHAMBA, H.P.
8. ARTI DEVI
D/O SH. SHUBHASH CHAND
R/O VILL. KARDIAL, P.O.
PHARIAN, TEHSIL JAWLI, DISTRICT
KANGRA, H.P.
9. INDU BALA
D/O SH. KARAM CHAND
R/O VILL. THARU,
PO & TEHSIL NAGROTA BAGWAN,
DISTRICTKANGRA, HP.
10. SHALINI THAKUR
W/O SH. VINAY PARMAR
(D/O SH. BANBIR THAKUR)
R/O MANGHER, PO BODA VIA BHAWARNA,
SUB TEHSIL BHAWARNA TEHSIL PALAMPUR,
DISTRICT KANGRA, HP.
11. ARTI DEVI
D/O SH. DURGA PARSAD
R/O HOUSE NO.286
SESSION ROAD KOTWALI BAZAR DHARAMSHALA,
DISTRICT KANGRA, HP.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
18
12. EKTA KAUNDAL
D/O SH. AJEET SINGH
R/O VILL. KHURD BANDI, P.O.
.
NAGANPATT, TEHSIL DHARAMSHALA
DISTRICT KANGRA, HP.
13. SNEH LATA
W/O SH. TILAK RAJ
R/O VILL. JHULLAR,
P.O. & TEHSIL SHAHPUR,
DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
14. POOJA DEVI
W/O SH. SACHIN KUMAR
(D/o Sh. RAMESH CHAND)
R/O VPO SUNANPUR,
TEHSIL SUJANPUR, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS.
15. H.P. STATE STAFF
SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
....PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(SH. NARESH KAUL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-14
AND MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-15)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1423/2020
Between:-
MEENA KUMARI,
W/O RAVINDER KUMAR,
R/O WARD NO. 1, VILLAGE- HATHLOON,
POST OFFICE HATLI, TEHSIL- BANGANA,
DISTRICT- UNA, H.P.
.........PETITIONER
(BY MS. SUMAN THAKUR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY(HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HEALTH, SHIMLA, H.P.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DIRECTORATE,
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
19
SHIMLA-9 H.P.
3. HIMACHAL PRADESH STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR,THROUGH ITS SECRETARIAT, HAMIRPUR,
.
DISTT. HAMIRPUR (H.P.)
.........RESPONDENTS
(MR. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION (ORIGINAL APPLICATION) NO. 5998 OF 2020
1. KASHAMTA SHARMA
W/O SH. ANIL AWASTHI,
R/O ARLA, TEHSIL PALAMPUR,
DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
2. SITA DEVI
W/O SH. BIDHI CHAND
R/O VPO TOURKHOLA, TEHSIL SANDHOL,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
3. NEELAM KUMARI
W/O SH. ANIL SHARMA,
R/O VILLAGE KRUST,
PO-CHOCKI JAMWALAN
TEHSIL & DISTT. HAMIRPUR, H.P.
4. NIDHI MISHRA
W/O SH. MUKESH SHARMA,
R/O VPO GHAROH,
TEHSIL DHARAMSHALA,
DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
5. BANTI DEVI
W/O SH. SUMAN KUMAR,
R/O VILL. BHALANA, P.O. REE
TEHSIL SUJANPUR,
DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.
6. KAMLESH KUMARI
D/O SH. BRIJ LAL
R/O VILL. JHINJKARI P.O. MAIR
TEHSIL & DISTT. HAMIRPUR, H.P.
7. ASHA KUMARI
W/O SH. NARENDER KUMAR,
R/O VILL. MAHRI, P.O. DHURKHRI
TEHSIL SARKAGHAT, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
20
8. SANTOSH THAKUR
W/O SH. BHARAT KUMAR
R/O HOUSE NO. 385/5, SAIN MUHALLA
.
MANDI, SADAR, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
9. SAVITRA DEVI
W/O SH. SURINDER JEET,
R/O VILL. THATTA, P.O. DEORI,
TEHSIL SADAR, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
..PETITIONERS
(BY SH. MADAN THAKUR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF H.P. THROUGH THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH)
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF H.P.
SHIMLA-2.
r to
2. THE DIRECTOR,
HEALTH SERVICES,
H.P. SHIMLA.
3. H.P. STAFF COMMISSION-HAMIRPUR,
DISTT. HAMIRPUR, H.P. THROUGH
IT SECRETARY.
4. RAKSHA DEVI
D/O SH. PARMA NAND,
R/O TYPE-2, QTR NO. 201, BSNL
COLONY-ROPA, P.O. BHOJPUR,
TEHSIL SUNDERNAGAR, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
5. NIRMLA KUMARI
W/O SH. ANOOP, H.NO. 20/08,
VILL. ROPA, P.O. BHOJPUR,
TEHSIL SUNDERNAGAR,
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
6. GUMATI DEVI
W/O SH. THAKAR DASS,
V.P.O. BALT, TEHSIL BALH
DISTRICT MANDI, H.P,
7. RENU CHANDEL
W/O SH. SURENDER KUMAR,
VILL. BHATER, P.O. TARKWARI
TEHSIL & DISTT, HAMIRPUR, H.P.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
21
PIN CODE-176045.
8. LATA DEVI
W/O SH. BHUMESH CHAND,
.
VILL. MAGLANA, P.O. KUFRI
TEHSIL PADHAR, DISTT. MANDI, H.P.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL
FOR R-1 & 2, MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 AND MR.
YOGESH KUMAR CHANDEL, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 TO R-8)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3476 OF 2021
Between:-
1. BIMLA DEVI
W/O SH. DINESH KUMAR
R/O VILLAGE TANOTA,
POST OFFICE CHOWAI,
TEHSIL ANI, DISTRICT KULLU,
HIMACHAL PRADESH.
2. PRIYANKA KUMARI
D/O OF VINOD KUMAR,
R/O VILLAGE BARGAON,
POST OFFICE BIR, TESHIL
AND DISTRICT MANDI
HIMACHAL PRADESH.
.....PETITIONERS
(BY MR. KULWANT SINGH GILL, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH THROUGH
SECRETARY (HEALTH) TO
THE GOVERNMENT OF
HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-2.
2. DIRECTOR HEALTH
SERVICES, HIMACHAL
PRADESH, SHIMLA-9.
3. HIMACHAL PRADESH
STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION,
HAMIRPUR, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR,
HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH
ITS SECRETARY.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:38 :::CIS
22
....RESPONDENTS
(SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R-1
.
AND R-2 AND MR. ANGREZ KAPOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)
RESERVED ON: 02.08.2021
DECIDED ON: 13.08.2021
These petitions are coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Mr.
Justice Satyen Vaidya, delivered the following:
ORDER
All these writ petitions involve common question of law and
facts, therefore, are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission (for short
'SSC') issued Advertisement No. 33-2/2017, (for short advertisement) dated
16.09.2017 inviting online applications from eligible candidates for the
different category of posts including 205 posts of Female Health Worker (on
contract basis) in the Department of Health and Family Welfare,
Government of Himachal Pradesh against Post Code 651.
3. Prescribed minimum educational and other qualifications for
the post of Female Health Worker was as under: -
i. Should be a Matric with Science/Higher Secondary Part-1 pass or its
equivalent from a recognized Board/Institution.
ii. Should possess one and half years training certificate as Female
Health Worker from a recognized Institute.
4. In response to the Advertisement, many such candidates applied
for the post of Female Health Worker, who did not possess requisite one &
.
half year training certificate as Female Health Worker. They instead were
equipped either with a decree in B.Sc. Nursing or Diploma in General
Nursing and Midwifery (in short 'GNM').
5. It is worth noticing at this stage that prior to issuance of
advertisement, there were a large number of precedents by way of judgments
passed by this Court whereby the courses of B.Sc. Nursing or GNM were
held to be higher in qualification than one & half year certificate course for
the Female Health Worker. In CWP No. 7164 of 2012, titled as Kiran
Gautam vs. State of H.P. and another, decided on 6th December, 2012, this
Court while deciding the identical issue held as under:-
".....There is no dispute that the petitioner has passed nursing
and midwife course which contains those requirements
required for the selection to the post of Female Health Worker
and she is in fact better qualified to hold that post......"
6. Similarly, in CWP No. 4515 of 2014 titled as Chandni Jaswal
vs. State of H.P and others decided on 30th June, 2014 while deciding the
identical controversy it was held as under:-
".........It is not in dispute that the petitioner has obtained three
years' diploma in GNM (General Nursing and Midwifery).
GNM is higher qualification. Since the petitioner is in
possession of higher qualification, she is fully eligible for the
post of Female Health Worker....."
.
These judgments were followed in number of subsequent cases and a few of
these are CWP No. 4628 of 2014 titled as Kiran Bala vs. State of H.P and
another, decided on 03.07.2014, CWP No. 4630 of 2014 titled as Sunita
Devi vs. State of H.P, decided on 03.07.2014, CWP No. 4440 of 2014 titled
as Pooja Sharma vs. State of H.P. and another, decided on 31.07.2014
and CWP No. 4445 of 2014 titled as Apsara Kumari vs. State of H.P and
another decided on 31.07.2014.
7. It is equally worth noticing that in all these judgments, neither
the employer department nor the recruiting agency (SSC), had disputed the
fact that the courses in B.Sc Nursing or GNM were higher in qualification
than one & half year certificate course for Female Health Worker. These
judgments attained finality and the petitioners therein were appointed as
Female Health Workers.
8. Understandably, in this background, candidate with B.Sc.
Nursing or GNM submitted their applications in response to advertisement.
Some of them qualified written test and also participated in evaluation
process/counselling.
9. Number of the candidates with B.Sc Nursing or GNM, by way
of different Original Applications, approached the erstwhile H.P. State
Administrative Tribunal on the premise that they had qualified the written
examination held by the SCC in pursuance to the advertisement and had also
.
participated in the subsequent evaluation process but were apprehensive that
their candidature might be rejected on the ground that they were not
possessing one-&-half year certificate course for the Female Health Worker.
These petitions came to be registered as O.A.(M)Nos. 800, 840, 801, 2834,
411, 384, 457, 422, 500, 495, 434, 1142, 1145, 627, 526 of 2019. All these
Original Applications were allowed by the erstwhile H.P. State
Administrative Tribunal vide separate orders by holding as under: -
"5. However, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the
respective cases of the applicants are squarely covered under the
judgments dated 6th December, 2012, Annexure A-5, in CWP No.
7164 of 2012-G, Kiran Gautam Versus State of HP and another,
and 30.06.2014, Annexure A-6, in CWP No. 4515 of 2014-A,
Chandni Jaswal Versus State of H.P. & Anr., rendered by the
Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh, and order dated 21 st
November, 2016 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 6089 of 2016,
Ruchi Rani Versus State of Himachal Pradesh.
6. The learned Additional Advocate General/Standing Counsel state
on behalf of the respondents that subject to verification of records,
if it is found that the applicants are similarly situate as the
petitioners/applicant in the aforesaid Writ Petitions/OA, their cases
shall be considered accordingly.
7. In view of the above, the original application is disposed of in
terms of the aforementioned judgments/order with a direction to the
respondents/competent authority(s) that subject to the above
verification and on finding the applicants to be similarly situate as
above, benefit of the said judgments/order, if the same have attained
.
finality/implemented, shall also be extended to them as per law,
within twenty days from today, after affording an opportunity of
being heard to them."
It goes without saying that in all these orders, the Ld. Tribunal specifically
recorded the stand of the State to the effect that the candidature of the
applicants in OAs, would be considered in accordance with judicial
precedents, noticed in the orders and in case it was found that the said
applicants were similarly situated as the petitioners in cases noticed as the
precedents, their cases would be considered accordingly.
10. In all the above noted judgments/orders either passed by this
Court or the Ld. Tribunal, the State had categorically admitted that the
qualification of B.Sc. Nursing or GNM was higher than the one & half year
training certificate as Female Health Worker. In addition, it had also not
refused to grant benefit of appointment to the post of Female Health Worker
to those persons who had higher qualification of B.Sc. Nursing or GNM.
The State, however, in its wisdom has subsequently assailed the above noted
orders passed by the Ld. Tribunal by way of CWP Nos. 3238, 3466, 3467,
3468, 3905, 3908, 3911, 3913, 3914, 3915, 3921, 3922, 3927, 3932 and
3933 of 2019, which are presently being considered.
11. Another writ petition being CWP No. 3476 of 2021 titled
Bimla Devi and another vs. State of H.P and others also came to be filed
.
before this Court on 18.10.2021 on the same grounds as raised by the
petitioners in Original Applications, noted above, before the Ld. Tribunal.
12. Some of the candidates possessing one & half year training
certificate as Female Health Worker, who had applied in pursuance to the
advertisement, also filed separate Original Application (M) No. 800 of 2018
before the Ld. Tribunal, on the premise that only those candidates who
possess essential qualification as per Advertisement were eligible to be
considered for the post of Female Health Worker and not the candidates
having B.Sc. Nursing or GNM as qualification. As a matter of fact,
challenge was laid to the action of SSC whereby the applications of the
candidates only with B.Sc. Nursing or GNM were accepted. Accordingly,
the prayers were made in the said Original Application. After closure of the
Tribunal, the Original Application (M) No. 800 of 2018 stood transferred to
this Court and has been registered as CWPOA No. 5598 of 2020. Another
CWP No. 1423 of 2020 came to be filed before this Court titled Meena
Kumari vs. State of H.P and others with almost same cause of action and
reliefs as in CWPOA No. 5598 of 2020. An additional challenge in this
petition was to a Notification dated 10.04.2020 issued by the Director,
Health and Family Welfare, Himachal Pradesh seeking to employ persons
against the different cadres including that of Female Health Worker on
outsource basis.
.
13. Now the questions that commonly arise for determination in all
above noted petitions are as under: -
i) Whether the State, in the facts and circumstances of the case, is
justified in changing its stand?
ii) Whether the candidates with B.Sc Nursing or GNM as qualification
are entitled to be considered for the post of Female Health Worker
in pursuance to the Advertisement ?
14. As noticed above, the State in the writ petitions filed against the
orders of Ld. Tribunal has taken the stand that candidates possessing B.Sc.
Nursing or GNM are eligible for the post of Staff Nurse. The categories of
Female Health Worker and Staff Nurse are altogether different having
separate Recruitment and Promotion Rules, seniority and different channels
of promotion. Even the nature of duties performed by both the categories
are different. The role of Multipurpose Health Worker (Female) is on the
preventive side by providing preventive services at the grass root level of the
Health Sub Centres, whereas the role of the Staff Nurses primarily is on
treatment side having postings at the minimum level of Primary Health
Centres.
15. State has also placed on record communication dated 04.9.2019
addressed by the Additional Chief Secretary Health, Government of
Himachal Pradesh to the Director, Health Services conveying its decision to
the effect that the judgment in Kiran Gautam's case was not examined in
.
consultation with the Law Department. Since the judgment in Kiran
Gautam's case had already been implemented along with some other
identical cases, therefore, those could not be agitated at a belated stage. The
persons who had already been granted appointment by implementing the
judgment in Kiran Gautam's case would have a strong case to agitate in the
Court. However, the Department was of the opinion that other cases decided
by Ld. Tribunal were liable to be agitated in view of law laid down in Jyoti
K.K. vs. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 5 SCC 596 and in
Civil Appeal Nos. 11853-11854 of 2018 titled as Zahoor Ahmad Rather
and others etc. vs. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad and others etc.
16. It appears that the decision of the State, to change its stand was
based upon its understanding of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in Jyoti K.K. vs. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 5 SCC
596 and in Civil Appeal Nos. 11853-11854 of 2018 titled as Zahoor
Ahmad Rather and others etc. vs. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad and others
etc. It is, however, not coming forth either from the contents of the petitions
filed by the State or communication dated 04.09.2019 relied upon by it as to
whether there was any conscious consideration on the applicability of the
ratio of aforesaid judgments to the facts of the cases in hand? Such an
exercise, in our view, does not appear to have taken place. We are
constrained to observe so because there is no utterance from State on the
.
binding effect of various judgments passed by this Court on the same subject
and in the identical fact situations. The State also appears to have not
considered that as a model employer, should it have adopted different
stances for different set of people in the similar circumstances and also the
legal implication of its earlier concessions/ admissions made before the
court/ tribunal.
17. In Jyoti K.K. vs Kerala Public Service Commission
(2015) 5 SCC 596, Rule10(a) (ii) of the Kerala State and Subordinate
Services Rules 1956 was considered which reads as under:-
"10. (a) (ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in these Rules or in
the Special Rules, the qualifications recognized by executive orders
or standing orders of Government as equivalent to a qualification
specified for a post in the Special Rules and such of those higher
qualifications which presuppose the acquisition of the lower
qualification prescribed for the post shall also be sufficient for the
post."
(emphasis supplied)
18. Their Lordships in paras 7 and 8 of the judgment passed in
Jyoti K.K. were pleased to hold as under: -
"7. It is no doubt true, as stated by the High Court that when a
qualification has been set out under the relevant Rules, the same
cannot be in any manner whittled down and a different qualification
cannot be adopted. The High Court is also justified in stating that
the higher qualification must clearly indicate or presuppose the
.
acquisition of the lower qualification prescribed for that post in
order to attract that part of the Rule to the effect that such of those
higher qualifications which presuppose the acquisition of the lower
qualifications prescribed for the post shall also be sufficient for the
post. If a person has acquired higher qualifications in the same
Faculty, such qualifications can certainly be stated to presuppose
the acquisition of the lower qualifications prescribed for the post. In
this case it may not be necessary to seek far."
"8. Under the relevant Rules, for the post of Assistant Engineer,
degree in Electrical Engineering of Kerala University or other
equivalent qualification recognised or equivalent thereto has been
prescribed. For a higher post when a direct recruitment has to be
held, the qualification that has to be obtained, obviously gives an
indication that such qualification is definitely higher qualification
than what is prescribed for the lower post, namely, the post of Sub-
Engineer. In that view of the matter the qualification of degree in
Electrical Engineering presupposes the acquisition of the lower
qualification of diploma in that subject prescribed for the post, shall
be considered to be sufficient for that post."
19. It was thus noted by their Lordships that there was no exclusion
of candidates who possessed a higher qualification.
20. In Zahoor Ahmad's case, Hon'ble Supreme Court after taking
into consideration the facts of that case and also the judgments passed on the
issue has held that the higher qualification in the said case did not include
the lower qualification and as such, the persons with higher qualification
were held not eligible for the post to which the specific requirement or lower
qualification was there.
.
21. In the facts of the present case, the State though has made
submissions that nature of duties for the cadre of Nurses as well as Female
Health Workers is different, but it has no-where been said that the nature of
duties enjoined upon the Nurses does not include the nature of duties of
Female Health Workers or in other words the curriculum of B.Sc Nursing or
GNM did not include that of one & half years certificate course for the
Female Health Worker. There is nothing on record to show that any special
training is imparted to Female Health Workers. Even in Jyoti K.K, it was
held that the higher qualification which pre-supposes the acquisition of
lower qualification could not be excluded from consideration. Though the
findings to this effect by the Hon'ble Supreme Court was based on a specific
rule of Public Service Commission concerned, yet its application in the facts
of present cases cannot be said to be untenable. We have also given our due
consideration to the extracts of office manual prescribing duties of Female
Health Worker as well as the Nurses and we have not been able to satisfy
ourselves as to on what count, the State envisages that duties of Nurses will
not include the duties of Female Health Workers.
22. Another important fact, which for the reasons best known to the
State, has not been brought to our notice is that the Recruitment and
Promotion Rules for the post of Staff Nurse (Class-III Non-Gazetted) framed
by the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Himachal Pradesh
.
prescribes method of recruitment to the said post by different modes
including 45% by direct recruitment, 45% by direct recruitment on batch-
wise basis and 10% by promotion. The feeder cadre eligible for the
promotion is of Female Health Worker subject to possessing of educational
qualification as prescribed for direct recruitment against Column No. 7(a)(i)
of R&P rules for staff nurses with five years regular service or regular
combined with continuous ad-hoc service rendered, if any, in the grade.
Notably, Column No. 7(a) (I) of above noted rules prescribes essential
qualification as 10+2 preferably with Science from the recognized Board of
School Education. Thus, a Female Health Worker having passed 10+2
examination from a recognized Board of School Education and having
served as Female Health Worker for five years as regular employee or
regular combined with continuous ad-hoc service is eligible to be promoted
as Staff Nurse. Thus, it is clear that if a Female Health Worker without
having undergone 1½ year certificate course and only with 10+2 and five
years experience at her back, can be promoted as Staff Nurse, then how it
lies in the mouth of the State to say that the nature of duties for both the
cadres is different.
23. Almost an identical proposition has been considered and
decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Puneet Sharma and others vs.
.
Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and another etc.
2021(5) Scale 468. In that case, the question was whether a degree in
Electrical Engineering/Electrical and Electronics Engineering was
technically higher qualification than a Diploma in that discipline and,
whether the degree holder were eligible for appointment to the post of Junior
Engineer (Electrical) under the relevant recruitment rules. By taking into
consideration various judgments pronounced by the Apex Court on the issue
or related thereto including in Jyoti K.K and Zahoor Ahmed's cases, their
Lordships have been pleased to hold that the degree holder though had
higher qualification, their qualification included the lower prescribed
qualification for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) and thus were
entitled to participate and to be considered for appointment on the said post.
In Puneet Sharma's case also, the Junior Engineer (Electrical) was entitled to
be promoted as Assistant Engineer as one of the feeder categories to the
quota of promotional post. In para 32 of the said judgment, it has been held
as under: -
"32. The latter (2) conclusively establishes that what the rule
making authority undoubtedly had in mind was that degree holders
too could compete for the position of JEs as individuals holding
equivalent or higher qualifications. If such interpretation were not
given, there would be no meaning in the 5% sub-quota set apart for
those who were degree holders before joining as Junior Engineers -
.
in terms of the recruitment rules as existing."
24. On analysis, we find that the facts involved in the bunch of
cases under consideration before this Court substantially resembles the facts
in Puneet Sharma's case, therefore, applying the ratio of said judgment, we
have no hesitation to hold that the candidates with B.Sc Nursing or GNM
have to succeed and are eligible to be considered for appointment to the post
of Female Health Worker advertised vide Advertisement No. 33-2/2017
dated 16.9.2017 by the SSC, in case they find place in merit list of
candidates against their respective category. It is also held that State is not
justified in changing its stand in the given facts of the case. Questions i) and
ii) framed herein above are answered accordingly.
25. We deem it necessary to observe that the proposition "higher
qualification will include lower qualification" cannot be applied universally
as an indefeasible rule, it will always depend upon the facts and
circumstances of each individual case.
26. Accordingly, Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3238, 3466, 3467, 3468,
3905, 3908, 3911, 3913, 3914, 3915, 3921, 3922, 3927, 3932 and 3933 of
2019, 3476 of 2021 and CWPOA 5598 of 2020 are dismissed. In view of
dismissal of these petitions and also the directions, we propose to issue
hereinafter; prayers made in CWP No. 1423 of 2020 and CWP No. 3476 of
2021 have been rendered infructuous.
.
27. We accordingly direct the Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection
Commission to declare the result of successful candidates in pursuance to
Advertisement No. 33-2/2017 by considering the candidates, with B.Sc.
Nursing or GNM, as eligible for the post of Female Health Worker in the
Department of Health and Family Welfare in addition to the candidates
having essential qualifications as per advertisement. We further direct the
SSC to make recommendations to the Government of Himachal Pradesh for
appointment to the post of Female Health Workers in respect of successful
candidates within a period of four weeks from today.
28. All the above noted petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid
terms, so also the pending application(s), if any, with no orders as to costs.
( Tarlok Singh Chauhan )
Judge
August , 2021 ( Satyen Vaidya )
(naveen) Judge
