Bal Krishan & Another vs State Of H.P. & Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 2176 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA




                                                                      .

                                  CWPOA No. 1248 of 2019
                                  Date of Decision : March 17, 2021





    Bal Krishan & another                                         ...Petitioners.
                                  Versus
    State of H.P. & others                                        ...Respondents.





    Coram:
    Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

    Whether approved for reporting?1

    For the petitioners         : Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate.

    For the respondent          : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Additional Advocate
                                  General & Mr. Manoj Bagga, Astt. A.G. for
                                  respondents No. 1 and 2/State.


                                 Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate,                          for
                                 respondent No. 3/Commission.

                                 Mr. Dalip K. Sharma,                 Advocate,         for




                                 respondents No. 4 to 15.





    Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. (Oral)

Petitioners, having remained unsuccessful in the

selection process initiated by the respondents for filling up

the posts of Range Forest Officers, pursuant to

advertisement dated 04.06.2011, have moved the instant

writ petition for the following substantive reliefs:

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

"(i) That a writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued for quashing the result of the written examination followed by physical standard test

.

and viva voce held by the respondents for the posts of Range Forest Officers in pursuance to the advertisement No. V/2011, dated 4.06.2011 at

Annexure P-5 qua candidates belonging to the category of Forestry as exhibited in Annexure P-8.

(ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to allow/grant the benefit of 5% weightage in favour of the

petitioners on the marks obtained in the written

examination before calculation of the final result and declare the petitioners successful in the written examination. The respondent No. 3 may

further be directed to take physical stand test and viva voce test of the petitioners and recommend the names of the petitioners in case they are

declared successful in the physical stand test and

may further be directed to offer appointment to

the petitions in pursuance to the selection process thus completed by the respondent No. 3. "

2. This case, as canvassed by the learned Counsel

for the petitioners, in nutshell is that respondents No. 1 to 3

advertised 39 posts of Range Forest Officers on 04.06.2011.

Petitioners alongwith others participated in the selection

process. They appeared in the written examination,

however, their names did not figure in the list of selected

.

candidates for the posts in question.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners were holding B.Sc. Degree in Forestry, therefore,

were entitled to 5% weightage in terms of the Himachal

Pradesh Forest Department, Range Forest Officer, Class-II

(Gazetted) Recruitment & Promotion (Ist Amendment )

Rules, 2011, for the posts in question (Annexure P-4)

(hereinafter referred to as the "Recruitment & Promotion

Rules"). The respondents did not grant them the weightage

of 5% marks. Had this weightage been granted to the

petitioners then names of both the petitioners would have

figured in the list of selected candidates.

On behalf of the respondents, it was contended that

the petitioners could not qualify the written examination as

they failed to obtain 40% marks in the optional subject of

Agriculture and, therefore, they were not entitled for

weightage of 5% marks.

3. Whether the petitioners would be entitled for

weightage of 5% marks would have to be determined vis-a-

vis the provisions of the Recruitment & Promotion Rules for

the posts of Range Forest Officers notified on 29.01.2011.

.

Rule 8 of the Appendix attached to the Recruitment &

Promotion Rules for the post in question reads as under:

"8. The ranking will be decided on the basis of the marks obtained in all compulsory and optional papers excluding marks of English papers though it would be

necessary to obtain 40% marks in each optional paper to qualify."

It will also be apposite to refer to the following Rule

No. 14:

"14. 5% marks in the written examination shall be

awarded to the Forestry Graduates as weightage for having completed 4 years degree course in Forestry."

Rule 5 is also relevant in this regard and is extracted

hereinafter:

"5. No candidate shall be considered to have qualified the written examination unless he/she obtains at least 40% marks in each compulsory papers and 45% marks in aggregate."

No doubt under Rule 14 of the Recruitment &

Promotion Rules, 5% marks in written examination are to

be awarded to the Forestry Graduates as weightage for

having completed four years degree course in Forestry but

this provision has to be read in conjunction and harmony

.

with the provisions existing in Rule 8 and Rule 5 which

provide that it will be necessary to obtain 40% marks in

each optional paper to qualify. It is admitted case of the

parties that the petitioners have not secured 40% marks in

the optional paper of Agriculture. Both the petitioners thus

failed to qualify the written examination. In my considered

view, the question of granting weightage to the petitioners

for having completed B.Sc. (Forestry) would have arisen

only on their qualifying the written examination. Having

failed to qualify the written examination i.e. having failed to

obtain 40% marks in the optional paper there was no

question to grant them weightage of 5% marks.

4. Petitioners admittedly having failed to qualify the

written examination inasmuch as having not secured

requisite 40% marks in the optional paper, were rightly not

granted 5% weightage.

No other point was urged.

Therefore, in the above background, there is no

merit in the present petition and the same is accordingly

dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand

disposed of.

.

(Jyotsna Rewal Dua), Judge.

    March 17 , 2021 (PK)





                  r        to