HP. Rajya Chayan Aayog, Hamirpur vs. Krishan Chand and others CMP(M) No.1296 of 2026 Item No.S-2 21.08.2026 Present: Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant. Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.2 & 3-State. Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shivani Priya, Advocate, for respondent No.5. CMP(M) No.1296 of 2026 Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit of the official, delay of 60 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. LPA No.497 of 2026 Inter alia contends that the writ petitioner belonged to SC (BPL) and had secured 41 marks which were above the qualifying cut-off of 35.50 for the BPL category. It is submitted that he was not called for the General BPL post and since he was claiming appointment under the SC category as well. It is pointed out that other three candidates who were called for the one post of BPL, were found not eligible for other reasons. There was another candidate belonging to SC (BPL), figuring at Sr. No.76 of the Roll Number Wise List-Combined of H.P. Staff Selection Commission, Hamirpur (at page 66) and having scored 45.00 marks, who had scored higher than the writ petitioner, who had scored 41.00 marks, and therefore, the directions issued as such, allowing the writ petition and directing the writ petitioner to be considered against the said post on account of the BPL candidates having not qualified, and none having been found eligible, would be against the principle of merit, since the appropriate directions which could have been issued were to operate the merit list further and direct consideration against the one post which still remained vacant. 2. It is also submitted that though an application for stay had been filed before the erstwhile Tribunal bearing MA No.622/2019 in O.A. No.5864 of 2019, the same was ordered to be heard with the main application and the posts were thereafter filled up pursuant to a subsequent advertisement. 3. Notice. Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General and Ms. Shivani Priya, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.2 & 3 and 5, respectively. 4. Notice be issued to respondent No.1, returnable for 09.10.2026, on taking steps within a week. List on 09.10.2026 CMP No.21607 of 2026 Operation and implementation of the judgment dated 24.04.2026, shall remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice August 21, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (ankit) Judge