2026:HHC:20294 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10466 of 2023 Decided on : 27.05.2026 Babli Devi Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vijay Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.P Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (oral) By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- “That the respondents may kindly be directed to firstly declare the result of interview held on 06.07.2022 for the post of Part Time Multi Task Worker in Government Middle School Kainthly, District Chamba, H.P and thereafter, issue appointment letter to the petitioner, being most suitable candidate for the aforesaid post, forthwith.” 2. Petitioner primarily has approached this Court with the prayer that the respondents be directed to offer appointment to her against the post of Part Time Multi Task Worker in Government Middle School, Kainthly, District Chamba, H.P as 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. 2026:HHC:20294 she and one Sh. Roop Singh had secured equal marks i.e. 22 marks and as she was elder, therefore, the post be offered to her. 3. When this case was heard by this Court on 22.04.2026, the following order was passed:- “Learned Additional Advocate General to produce the record of the selection process. The record has been summoned by the Court for the reason that as per learned Counsel for the petitioner as there is a tie between the petitioner and another candidate, the petitioner has to be offered appointment, she being elder in age. As prayed for, list on 11.05.2026. Record be produced on the said date.” 4. Thereafter when the record was produced before the Court on 11.05.2026, the following order was passed based on the record:- “The original record of the selection stands perused for the perusal of the Court and the same demonstrates that there were four candidates, who participated in the process, namely, Vikas Kumar, S/o Balkrishan, Babli, D/o Umed Singh, Dogru Ram, S/o Pawan Kumar and Roop Singh, S/o Rijhu Ram. Vikas Kumar secured 19 marks, Babli secured 22 marks, Dogru Ram secured 30 marks and Roop Singh secured 22 marks. Thus the result sheet demonstrates that it is not the petitioner and Roop Singh who were tied at the first spot but it was Sh. Dogru Ram who was the first as far as merit prepared by the Selection Committee is concerned. A perusal of the reply to the writ petition filed by the respondents also demonstrates that the stand of the Department on the affidavit of Director Elementary Education that Dogru Ram, S/o Pawan Kumar, was the most meritorious in the selection process. That being so, 3. 2026:HHC:20294 communication addressed by the Block Primary Education Officer, dated 26.08.2022, Annexure P-3, on the basis of which, the petitioner has approached the Court is erroneous as this communication has been issued in ignorance of the merit list prepared by the Selection Committee. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be granted some time to have instructions in the matter. As prayed for, list on 19.05.2026. Original record stands returned back. Learned Additional Advocate General is directed to keep a photocopy of the mark sheet available for the perusal of the Court for the next date of hearing.” 5. This was followed by the following order passed on 19.05.2026:- “When this case was taken up today, Mr. Vijay Chaudhary, learned Counsel for the petitioner, with the leave of the Court, made a submission that he had also perused the record brought by the State on the last date and in terms thereof, though Shri Dogru Ram was having maximum marks in terms of the result sheet but correspondence demonstrates that 8 marks were awarded to him under the heading of Benchmark Disability but he could not produce the relevant certificate relating to his benchmark disability. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the reply filed by the Department and has submitted that a perusal thereof demonstrates that it was mentioned therein that result could not be declared or announced as alteration was found in the documents submitted by Mr. Dogru Ram. Learned Additional Advocate General is directed to produce the record on the next date of hearing and also have instructions in this regard as to why Mr. Dogru Ram was not offered appointment despite the fact that in terms of the result sheet, he was the candidate with maximum marks. Correspondence relating to award of marks under the heading of Benchmark Disability be also produced on said date. List on 28.05.2026.” 6. Today, learned Deputy Advocate General has produced the record of selection as well as he has handed over instructions 4. 2026:HHC:20294 received from Block Elementary Education Officer, Kalhel at Nakror, District Chamba, H.P and a perusal thereof demonstrates that in the process of selection undertaken, Sh. Dogru Ram was found to be the most meritorious but declaration of result was deferred for the reason that on the medical certificate submitted by the petitioner it was not mentioned whether the physical disability, with which, Dogru Ram was suffering was permanent or temporary and the matter was referred to the Chief Medical Officer, Chamba, for verification of this fact and Chief Medical Officer Chamba, finally on 01.12.2023 provided verification of disability certificate of Dogru Ram, wherein, disability was certified as permanent. 7. It is further contained in the instructions that Dogru Ram is primarily eligible for appointment, however, as the present petitioner has preferred this petition, therefore, the appointment process has been kept pending in the light of order passed by this Court on 19.12.2023. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned Deputy Advocate General and having perused the instructions, which were made available for the perusal of the Court today, this Court is of the considered view that when undoubtedly and undisputedly, Sh.Dogru Ram was found to be 5. 2026:HHC:20294 most meritorious in the selection process and he indeed is eligible for appointment and now the medical certificate also establishes that the disability of Sh.Dogru Ram is permanent and not temporary, all that this Court can do is, order the authorities to issue appointment in favour of the most meritorious candidate. 9. The petitioner cannot be granted any relief as the appointment has to be offered to the most meritorious candidate i.e. Sh. Dogru Ram. However, if for some reason, after the offer of appointment to Sh. Dogru Ram, he does not joins, then, intra petitioner and Sh. Roop Singh, between whom there is a tie, the appointment be offered to the candidate, who is elder in age until and unless there are instructions to the contrary, which governs such like situation. 10. With these observations, the petition stands dismissed. Accordingly, stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge May 27, 2026 (meera)