Disposed

Vikas Chauhan v. State of Hp and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC1 Nov 2022CWP/5147/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, handling admission of a writ petition seeking appointment as a Multi Task Worker, directed the petitioner to approach the Additional District Magistrate via appeal under the newly added Rule 19, despite the result being declared prior to the rule's insertion, ensuring the appeal is tried on merits without delay.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the Additional District Magistrate, Bilaspur within 15 days under Rule 19; clarified no rejection on grounds of delay.

Vikas Chauhan Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Education and Admissions | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶3

ON THE 1^st DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SABINA &

¶6

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA

¶7

CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.5147 of 2022

¶8

Between:-

¶9

VIKAS CHAUHAN, S/O SH. SHANKAR DASS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DUNGLU, POST OFFICE, NAMHOL, TEHSIL NAMHOL, DISTRICT BILASPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH, AGED 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION UNEMPLOYED. ..….PETITIONER

¶10

(BY MR. AJIT SHARMA AND PRASHANT SHARMA ADVOCATES)

¶11

AND

¶12

1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH SECRETARY (EDUCATION) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-2.

¶13

2. DIRECTOR, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

¶14

3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, DISTRICT BILASPUR.

¶15

4. BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

¶16

OFFICER, SADAR, DISTRICT BILASPUR.

¶17

5. GRAM PANCHAYAT, DUNGLU, TEHSIL NAMHOL, DISTRICT BILAPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH ITS PRADHAN.

¶18

6. ABHISHEK, SON OF LATE SHRI RAMESH, RESIDENT SOSAN (JAMLA), TEHSIL NAMHOL, UP-TEHSIL NAMHOL, DISTRICT

¶19

¶20

BILASPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH, AGED 19 YEARS. .…… RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY MR. ASHWANI K. SHARMA, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR R-1 TO R-5, MR. NARESH K. SHARMA, ADVOCATE ON BEHALF OF MR. PANKAJ THAKUR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-6)

¶22

This Petition is coming on for admission this day, Hon’ble

¶23

Ms. Justice Sabina , passed the following:

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

Petitioner has filed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief(s):-

¶26

“i) That appointment of private respondent no.6 may kindly be quashed and set aside, same being violative of recruitment policy for post in question, in the interest of justice and fair play.

¶27

ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to appoint petitioner to the post of Multi Task Worker.”

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now vide Addendum dated 25^th August, 2022, Rule-19 has been added to the Policy and as per the said rule, appeal can be filed before the Additional District Magistrate (ADM) of the District within 15 days of the selection/appointment. In the present case, the result was declared on 10^th June, 2022 . Hence, the petitioner would not be able to avail the benefit of newly added Rule-19. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner will approach the Additional

¶29

¶30

District Magistrate, Bilaspur, by way of an appeal within 15 days from today and the same should not be rejected by the competent authority on the ground that it is time barred as the Rule 19 has been incorporated on 25^th August, 2022.

¶31

Rule-19, provided vide Addendum dated 25^th August, 2022, reads as under:-

¶32

“ ADDENDUM

¶33

In partial modification of this Department's Notification No. EDN-C-B(1)2/2019 dated 16th July, 2020 (as updated upto 11th March, 2022), the Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to add "Rule-19 Appellate Authority" in the Part Time Multi Task Workers Policy, 2020 as under:

¶34

19. Appellate Authority.

¶35

4 The appeal in respect of complaints relating to PTMTW selection/appointment etc. should be made to the Additional District Magistrate (ADM) of the district within 15 days of the selection/appointment. The appeal will be considered by the Additional District Magistrate (ADM) of the district and disposed off within 30 days from its receipt with suitable directions. If the complainant is not satisfied with the outcome, then he/she may file an appeal with the Director of Higher/Elementary Education, as the case may be, within 15 days from the decision of the Additional District Magistrate (ADM). The appellate authority may dispose off the appeal within 60 days after hearing the appellant.

¶36

By Order Devesh Kumar, IAS Pr. Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.”

¶37

¶38

Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for

¶39

the petitioner, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by permitting the petitioner to approach Additional District Magistrate, Bilaspur, by way of an appeal within 15 days from today and the said authority will dispose of the appeal in terms of Rule 19, provided vide Addendum dated 25^th August, 2022.

¶40

It is clarified that the appeal filed by the petitioner would not be rejected on the ground of delay, but would be disposed of on merits.

¶41

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

¶42

( Sabina ) Judge

¶43

( Sushil Kukreja) Judge

¶44

November 01, 2022 (ks)

Vikas Chauhan v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Chauhan v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sher Singh Vs State of Hp

Rajinder Kumar Vs State of Hp

M/S Bobby Dadri Vs State of Hp and Others

Pushpa Thakur and Others Vs State of Hp and Others

Bijender Kumar Jain Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mamta Devi Vs State of Hp and Ors.