IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 12526/2026 Decided on: 23.09.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reeta Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Ors. .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Prajwal Busta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents/State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge In the selection process conducted by the respondent for the post of ASHA Worker pursuant to the public notice issued on 21.11.2025, respondent No. 6, with 17.6 marks, emerged successful and was appointed as such for Gram Panchayat Pini, Block Jari, District Kullu. Respondent No. 7, with 16.8 marks, was placed in the waiting list. The petitioner, with 16.6 marks and otherwise third in the merit list, has filed this writ petition seeking quashing of the merit list drawn on 09.12.2025. 2. The only ground urged during the hearing of the writ petition by learned counsel for the petitioner for redrawing the merit was that respondent No. 6 was not entitled to the two marks 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 awarded to her for belonging to the Scheduled Caste category. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No. 6 did not belong to the Scheduled Caste category by birth. She had only married to a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste category. The aforesaid submissions were also noticed in the following order passed in this writ petition on 27.07.2025: - “Notice confined to respondents No.1 to 5, at this stage. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 5. Learned Legal Aid Counsel has submitted that one of the grounds of challenge to the engagement of the private respondents as Asha Worker is that she has obtained appointment on the strength of a Scheduled Caste Certificate, whereas the respondent is not a Scheduled Caste of the State of Himachal by birth. Learned Additional Advocate General is directed to have specific instructions in this regard. He is further directed to produce the record of selection and also the record relating to the applications filed by the petitioner and the private respondents for the post in issue on the next date of hearing. As prayed for, list on 05.08.2026. The above was followed by the order dated 05.08.2026, as under: - “Learned Deputy Advocate General has produced the documents which were submitted by the private respondent at the time when she applied for the post. It is not clear from the Scheduled Caste certificate appended by the private respondent as to whether she is a Scheduled Caste by birth or she has obtained this certificate on account of her having solemnized marriage. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that he may be granted some time to clarify the said fact. 3 List on 24th August, 2026 on which date instructions as to the factum of the private respondent being a Scheduled Caste by birth or having acquired this status post-marriage be communicated to the court.” Pursuant to above, the respondent-State placed on record instructions dated 22.08.2026 from the Mission Director, National Health Mission, along with certain documents, and submitted that respondent No. 6 belongs to the Scheduled Caste category by birth and that her caste is ‘Lohar’, which is also a Scheduled Caste. Taking note of the said order, the following order was passed on 24.08.2026: - “Learned Deputy Advocate General has handed over to the Court instructions dated 22.08.2026, received from the Mission Director, National Health Mission, alongwith certain documents appended therewith. On the strength thereof, learned Deputy Advocate General submits that the private respondent is a Scheduled Caste by birth and her caste is ‘Lohar’ which is a Scheduled Caste. Faced with this situation, learned Counsel for the petitioner prays that she may be granted some time to have instructions. List 22.09.2026 to enable her to have instructions. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent No. 6, though has been reflected as Scheduled Caste by birth in record of the respondents, reflecting her specific caste as ‘Lohar’, but in some of the documents, the caste of respondent No. 6 has been mentioned as ‘Rajput’, however, the same has been struck off with a blue pen. 4 4. In view of the copies of the Shajra Nasab/pedigree placed on record by the respondents for different years, right from the year 1980-81 up to the year 2020, duly verified by the competent authority, i.e., Naib Tehsildar, Sub-Tehsil Jari, District Kullu, reflecting respondent No. 6 as belonging to the Scheduled Caste category by birth and her caste as ‘Lohar’, the factual assertion made by the petitioner that respondent No. 6 belongs to the Rajput caste or that she does not belong to the Scheduled Caste category by birth, cannot be accepted in this writ petition instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The documents placed on record, based on the record of the official respondents and issued by the competent authority are to be given due credence. In case there is a dispute on facts, it is for the petitioner to seek an appropriate remedy, in accordance with law. It also needs to be mentioned that the petitioner stood at serial number 3 in the merit list. No other point was urged. With above observations, the instant petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 23rd September, 2026 rohit