IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWPOA No.7256 of 2019 Decided on: 28.03.2025 Anjana Kumari ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Shubham Singh Guleria, Advocate vice Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3 & 6. Respondent No.4 and 5 already ex- parte. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral) The instant petition has been filed for following reliefs: “i) That the impugned appointment order dated 01.01.2015 (Annexure A-1) may very kindly be quashed and set aside being illegal, wrong, discriminatory and unconstitutional an the respondents may be directed to appoint the applicant as Language Teacher Hindi on SMC basis in the Govt. Sr. Sec. School Gangath, Tehsil Nurpur District Kangra Himachal Pradesh. ii) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly direct the respondents to appoint the applicant from the date Respondent No.5 was appointed against the 2 post of Language Teacher (Hindi) as the appointment of Respondent No.5 was void abinitio. iii) That the Respondents may very kindly be directed to produce the entire record regarding this case before this Hon'ble Tribunal. v) That this application may be allowed with costs.” 2. Respondent No.5 was considered for appointment as LT in Government Senior Secondary School, Gangath, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra under SMC policy w.e.f. 01.01.2015 as against the claim of petitioner, who was one of the candidates for the said post and had been placed lower in the merit. The case of the petitioner is that on the date when private respondent No.5 had submitted her application i.e. on 14.11.2014, she was not holding Master’s degree and her result was still awaited. On this count, private respondent No.5 was awarded 6.03 marks which raised her total score to 47.45 as against the marks 41.54 awarded to the petitioner. It is contended by the petitioner that after deduction of 6.03 marks from overall score of private respondent No.5, she would stand at the score of 41.42 and would be having lower merit than the petitioner. On such premise, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the appointment of private respondent No.5 and also sought a mandate of her appointment 3 to the post of LT in Government Senior Secondary School, Gangath, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra. 3. Record reveals that prior to this petition also, the petitioner had approached the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal (for short, “the Tribunal”) by way of OA No.3846 of 2015 for same relief. During the pendency of OA No.3846 of 2015, private respondent No.5 resigned from the post of LT in Government Senior Secondary School, Gangath. Thereafter, OA No.3846 of 2015 was disposed of by learned Tribunal vide order dated 05.01.2016 in the following terms:- “9. In view of the above, the original application is disposed of with a direction to respondents, No.1 to 4 to consider the case of the applicant for appointment as Language Teacher-LT (Hindi) as SMC appointee against the vacancy caused due to resignation of private respondent No.5, on the strength of her ranking at No.2 in the interview in accordance with rules/law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within thirty days from the date of production of certified/self attested copies of this order before respondents No.1 to 4 by the applicant.” 4. In compliance to the aforesaid order of learned Tribunal, the decision was taken by the competent Authority on 09.02.2016 in following terms: 4 “Subject:-OA-No. 3846/2015-titled as Anjana Kumari V/S State of H.P. Sir, In compliance of Directorate of Elementary Education office letter No. EDN-Ele. (III) OA No. 3846/2015-Kangra dated 30.01.2016, regarding the subject cited above In this context, it is pertinent to mention here that there is no provision as such in the SMC policy notified vide Govt. of HP Notification No. EDN-C- A(4)-1/2011 dated 17.07.2012, that the candidate who stand at second place in selection list, could be given appointment if the candidate who is selected and joined & further resigned. You are therefore directed to take action in this matter as per the provisions of the SMC policy." 5. In view of fact that the petitioner had failed to secure an order on merits in OA No.3846 of 2015, she cannot be allowed again to re-agitate the matter by way of instant petition. The petitioner had acquiesced with the order dated 05.01.2016 passed by the learned Tribunal, whereby the only direction issued to the respondents was to consider the case of petitioner for appointment as LT as SMC appointee against the vacancy caused due to the resignation of respondent No.5. It was also observed that such order was being passed on the strength of ranking of petitioner at Serial No.2 in the interview. Thus, it is 5 clear that the petitioner had agreed to be considered for appointment as LT against the vacancy caused due to resignation of private respondent No.5 on the strength of petitioner’s ranking in the interview at Serial No.2. The necessary corollary would be that the petitioner had waived her right to the original claim challenging the appointment of respondent No.5 to the post of LT in Government Senior Secondary School, Gangath, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra. 6. In view of above discussion, there is no merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed along with pending application(s), if any. ( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge 28th March, 2025 (vt)