IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9846 of 2025 Decided on: 27th June, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Sheetal Thakur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Mohan Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in this matter on 19.06.2025:- “Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, accepts service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Issue notice to respondent No.4, returnable for 27.06.2025, on taking steps during the course of the day. Dasti notice be also issued for the service of respondent No.4 on usual terms. Respondents No. 1 to 3 to also apprise respondent No.4 about the next date of listing of the case. 2. Petition concerns selection process being undertaken by the respondents for filing up two posts of Senior Residents in Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Government Medical College & Hospital (SLBSGMCH) Mandi at Ner Chowk, H.P.. Petitioner has also participated in the selection process. The selection to the posts of Senior Residents is stated to be governed by Notification dated 24.12.2021. Note (2) of Clause 7.2 of the Notification states that ‘the candidate shall apply only in one Government Medical College/Institution during each round of recruitment/ counselling/ selection’. 3. The petitioner, who is at Sr. No.3 of the final merit list of Senior Residents in the Department of ENT, SLBSGMCH, Mandi, has objection to respondent No.4’s participation in the counselling, which is scheduled for tomorrow (20.06.2025) on the ground that he has applied in more than one Government Medical Colleges in violation of Clause 7.2.2 of the Senior Residents Policy. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s objection has been duly noticed by the respondents in the remarks column in the final merit list (Page 65), yet he is being permitted to appear in the counselling, whereas, petitioner, who is next in the merit list, on the basis of marks awarded to her as of now, has not been recommended on the ground that there are only two posts and candidates at Sr. Nos. 1 and 2 (respondent No.4) of the merit list have been recommended. Another ground urged is that in lieu of withdrawal from the selection process by Dr. Aruna Bhagat, belonging to Jammu & Kashmir, the petitioner was required to be given marks for her post-graduation, which has not been done by the respondents. In case of award of marks under this heading, the total tally of marks of the petitioner would jump and make her even otherwise within the top two positions of the final seniority list. 4. The contentions of the petitioner cannot be brushed aside at this stage. There appears to be a prima-facie case in her favour. In fact, perusal of final merit list (page 65) gives the impression that respondents themselves have not cleared the candidature of respondent No.4, yet are permitting him to appear in the counselling, whereas, petitioner is not being permitted to appear in the counselling on the ground that respondent No.4’s candidature has been recommended. Whether respondent No.4 could have applied for more than one Colleges for the post of Senior Resident and on that count, his candidature would be bad in law, is another aspect is to be examined. 3 Additionally, petitioner has also staked her claim for marks for her post-graduation. In view of above, irreparable loss shall be caused to the petitioner, in case interim relief is not granted to her. Accordingly, respondents are directed not to conduct counselling for two posts of Senior Residents ENT at Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri Government Medical College & Hospital, Mandi at Ner Chowk, scheduled for 20.06.2025, without the leave of the Court. Reply by the appearing respondents be filed before the next date of hearing. List on 27.06.2025.” 2. Pursuant to the above directions, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 25.06.2025 from the Principal, SLBSGMC&H, Mandi. Relevant portion of office instructions reads as under:- “This office has sought clarification from Respondent No.2 i.e. Director Medical Education & Research, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-9 that what action will be taken against the candidate who had applied more than one institution, the copy of letter dated 17.06.2025 is enclosed as Annexure R-1. The clarification has been received from the Respondent No.2 i.e. Director Medical Education & Research, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-9 vide letter dated 24.06.2025 in which it was conveyed “that the candidature of Dr. Arun Kumar is hereby rejected for the post of Senior Resident ENT in the current round from all above mentioned Government Medical Colleges of the state”. The copy of letter dated 24.06.2025 is enclosed herewith as Annexure R-2. In pursuant to the clarification received from Respondent No.2 i.e. Director Medical Education & Research, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-9 the candidature of Dr. Arun Kumar has been excluded from the merit list and fresh merit list has been drawn and uploaded on the college web-site vide this office order dated 25.06.2025. The copy of merit list is enclosed herewith as Annexure R-3. The orders passed by Hon'ble Court in the above CWP vide order dated 19.06.2025 are being complied. The date of counseling for Senior Resident in 4 the department of ENT was postponed till further orders.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Appendix-A attached with Annexure R-3 with the office instructions dated 25.06.2025, recommends name of the petitioner for the post of Senior Resident (GDO) against the vacant post as petitioner’s name now figures at Sr. No.2 in the revised merit list drawn by the respondents. Learned counsel further submits that the aforesaid office instructions dated 25.06.2025 alongwith the documents appended therewith, including Appendix-A with Annexure R-3, redress the grievance of the petitioner raised in this writ petition. In view of the office instructions placed on record by the respondents and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition to stand disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 27, 2025 Judge Mukesh