2025:HHC:42879 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWPOA No. 484 of 2010 Decided on : 04.12.2025 __________________________________________________________ Anju Devi and another .....Petitioners Versus State of H.P and another ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? No. For the petitioner: Mr. Pavan Kumar Advocate and Mr. Prantap Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Petitioners, Anju Devi and Neelam Kumari, initially filed CWP No. 660 of 2011 before this Court and upon establishment of Learned State Administrative Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to the Tribunal and upon abolition of Tribunal, the same has been re-transferred to this Court as CWPOA No.484 of 2019 seeking the following reliefs:- “1) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondent State to look to the legitimate grievance of the petitioners 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:42879 for considering them for the posts of Home Science teachers as per R&P Rules on session-wise basis. (ii). That further a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondent State not to fill up the posts of Home Science Teachers under 5% quota from other Districts, i.e. other than District Bilaspur”. FACTUAL MATRIX: 2. Grievance of the petitioners is that they have passed Two Years’ Diploma in Home Science from Technical Education Council U.P. [Lucknow] on 23.10.1998 [as per Annexure P-2 colly]. It is averred that Government of Himachal Pradesh had issued a Notification dated 29.09.1984 [Annexure P-1], giving recognition to aforesaid Diploma in Home Science awarded by Technical Education Council, U.P. [Lucknow] for purposes of employment in Himachal Pradesh by treating it as equivalent to Home Science Two Years’ Course of Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education and based on the Notification dated 29.09.1984 [Annexure P-1], the benefit of equivalence of said Diploma has been granted for the purposes of employment to other similar incumbents as in CWP No.153 of 1996 on 07.03.1996 [Annexure P-4] 3 2025:HHC:42879 and in CWP (T) No.13937 of 2008 on 12.11.2009 [Annexure P-5]. NO RESPONSE BY STATE: 3. Respondents have not filed any Response to the Writ Petition since 26.02.2011. INSTRUCTIONS BY STATE DURING HEARING: 4. In view of the nature of controversy, this Court directed Learned State Authorities vide orders dated 17.11.2025 to file Short Reply/Instructions within a week as to whether Two Years Diploma in Home Science [as per Annexure P-2 colly], is covered by the Government Notification dated 29.09.1984 [Annexure P-1] or not; and whether petitioners are eligible for the post of Home Science Teachers as per the Recruitment and Promotion Rules or not? 5. Pursuant to the orders dated 17.11.2025, Learned Counsel has furnished the Instructions dated 02.12.2025 [Taken on Record] indicating that Two Years Diploma in Home Science issued by Board of Technical Education, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow is covered under the Government Notification dated 29.09.1984 [Annexure 4 2025:HHC:42879 P-1] and such Diploma has been treated as equivalent to Home Science Two years Course from Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education. Instructions further indicate that the petitioners were eligible for the post of Home Science Teachers as per the Recruitment & Promotion Rules dated 28.12.1973. Aforesaid Instructions further indicate that no appointment of Home Science Teacher(s) were made in District Bilaspur from 1998 till date. The Instructions further indicate that due to enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, [hereinafter referred to as RTE Act], since there is no provision for recruitment of Home Science Teachers, therefore, the initiative for recruitment of Home Science Teachers could not be taken by the State Government. 6. Heard. Mr. Pavan Kumar, Learned Counsel, appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Sumit Sharma, Learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents- state. ANALYSIS: 7. Taking into account the entirety of facts and circumstances, though Respondent-State has granted 5 2025:HHC:42879 equivalence to Two Years Diploma in Home Science passed from Board of Technical Education, Uttar Pradesh, in terms of Notification dated 29.09.1984 issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh but since there is no provision for recruitment of Home Science Teachers under The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, therefore, in peculiar facts of this case, this Court cannot issue a mandate, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners for appointment as Home Science Teachers in the Respondent-Department. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has not been able to establish any statutory rights so as to compel the State to fill the posts. In absence of any legal rights, this Court refrains from directing the Respondents-State Authorities to consider or appoint the petitioners, as Home Science Teachers, outrightly. DIRECTIONS 8. In view of the above discussion and for the reasons recorded hereinabove, the instant petition is disposed of in the following terms:- 6 2025:HHC:42879 (i) On decision by the Respondents to initiate the recruitment for the post of Home Science Teachers under The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Recruitment or Promotion Rules; the Respondents shall consider the petitioners, if eligible; (ii) Subject to eligibility and fulfillment of other criteria as per recruitment notice and the Rules/Norms the State shall consider the claim for appointment, in case junior incumbents [of 1998 and subsequent batches] were appointed as Home Science Teachers; and (iii) Partis to bear respective costs. 9. In aforesaid terms, the instant petition and all pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall accordingly stand disposed of. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge December 04, 2025 [G.M]