Sanjna Kumari vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 17305 HP

                                                    1




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                              CWP No.4328 of 2022
                                              Date of Decision : 01.11.2023




                                                                                .

    Sanjna Kumari
                                                                         ...... Petitioner
                                     Versus





    State of Himachal Pradesh and others
                                                                         ......Respondents

    Coram:





    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge
                                     1
    Whether approved for reporting? No


    For the petitioner           :   Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Advocate vice Mr. Atul
                        r            Kumar, Advocate.

    For the respondents :            Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with
                                     Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate
                                     General, for respondents No.1 to 5/State.


                                     Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj, Advocate, for respondent
                                     No.7.




    Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral)

Vide Press Note dated 12.04.2022 (Annexure P-2), post in

question, i.e., Part time Multi Task Worker, had been advertised.

For the said post so advertised, petitioner and respondent No.7

have participated in the recruitment process alongwith one

Madhu.

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

2. Call letters for verification of documents in furtherance of

aforesaid recruitment process were issued for 27.06.2022. The

recruitment process for the post of Part time Multi Task Worker

.

has been done in furtherance of the notification dated 16.07.2020.

A perusal of the aforesaid notification categorically reflects that

selection criteria/awarding of marks, has been detailed therein at

Sr. No.7.

3. For the purpose of present petition, this Court is only

concerned with the allocation of marks to candidate whose family

has donated land for the construction of school in question. On

the said count, in terms of the notification, 08 marks were to be

awarded. In this context, it would be appropriate to refer to

clarification dated 24.05.2022 appended as Annexure P-6 with the

petition. As per the said clarification, the term 'Family' of the

'Land Doner' would include his/her spouse and their children. The

petitioner in the case at hand is the daughter-in-law of the 'Land

Doner' in question.

4. In the aforesaid backdrop, present petitioner has laid

challenge to the clarification dated 24.05.2022, i.e., Annexure 6,

insofar as it pertained to the definition of the word 'Family' of the

'Land Doner'.

5. At this juncture, it would be appropriate to refer to judgment

dated 28.06.2022, passed in CWP No.4139 of 2022, titled

Surender Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others,

.

wherein, validity of the said notification dated 24.05.2022, insofar

as it pertains to the family of the 'Land Doner', had been assailed.

Therein, the validity of the term 'Family' as prescribed in the

notification dated 24.05.2022 was upheld. In view of the fact that

issue sought to be contested in the case at hand is no longer res

integra, therefore, petition must fail.

6. In view of above observations, present petition is dismissed.

Interim order dated 04.07.2022 stands vacated. The respondents

are directed to declare the result of the recruitment process within

two weeks from the date of pronouncement of the order.

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

disposed of.

                                              ( Bipin Chander Negi)
    November 01, 2023 (KS)                            Judge