JUDGMENT P.S. Rana, J. 1. Order Present civil writ petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India. Brief facts of the case as pleaded are that elections of PTA were held for the year 2004-05 in Government High School Beetan Tehsil Haroli District Una HP. It is further pleaded that vide resolution dated 16.6.2004 petitioner namely Kiran Mai was engaged as language teacher as per remuneration of Rs. 1700/- per month to be paid out of PTA fund vide Annexure P-4. It is further pleaded that thereafter petitioner worked continuously without any break in the school. It is also pleaded that petitioner was asked not to come to school and petitioner represented her case to respondent Nos. 4 and 5 i.e. Headmaster Government High School and the President Parents-Teachers Association Government High School Beetan Tehsil Haroli District Una for grant-in-aid but the same has not been decided till date. It is further pleaded that respondents be directed to release grant-in-aid w.e.f. 2004 immediately and further pleaded that respondents be also directed not to dispense with services of petitioner. 2. Per contra reply filed on behalf of the respondents pleaded therein that petitioner was not engaged against the post of language teacher as per procedure and norms and further pleaded that petitioner was not engaged as per Recruitment and Promotion Rules prevalent at the time of her appointment. It is further pleaded that petitioner was engaged by PTA Committee of Government High School as stop gap arrangement on temporary basis by way of passing a simple resolution. It is further pleaded that claim of the petitioner for continuation on the post of language teacher is not justified and is contrary to law. It is further pleaded that as petitioner was not engaged as per procedure and norms and was not engaged as per Recruitment and Promotion Rules and her services are rightly terminated by PTA Committee of Government High School Beetan, Tehsil Haroli District Una. Prayer for dismissal of writ petition sought. 3. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents-State and Court also perused the entire record carefully. 4. Following points arise for determination in this civil writ petition:- 1. Whether petitioner will be allowed to continue in service as language teacher in Government High School Beetan, Tehsil Haroli District Una HP on PTA basis? 4. Following points arise for determination in this civil writ petition:- 1. Whether petitioner will be allowed to continue in service as language teacher in Government High School Beetan, Tehsil Haroli District Una HP on PTA basis? 2. Whether petitioner is legally entitled for release of grant-in-aid w.e.f. 2004 as alleged? Findings on point No. 1 5. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner be allowed to continue as language teacher in Government High School Beetan on PTA basis is rejected being devoid of any force for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. It is proved on record that petitioner was appointed as Hindi language teacher as per remuneration of Rs. 1700/- per month as per resolution passed by PTA Committee on dated 16.6.2004 (Annexure P-4). Court has perused Annexure P-4 dated 16.6.2004 carefully. There is no recital in resolution dated 16.6.2004 that applications were invited for post of language teacher by PTA Committee from general public. There is no mention in resolution dated 16.6.2004 that advertisement was issued to the general public for the post of Hindi language teacher. It is held that any appointment on public post without any notice to the general public is contrary to the Recruitment and Promotion Rules. It is held that appointment of petitioner to the post of language teacher was stop gap appointment only. It was held in case reported in AIR 1989 SC 696 titled Haribans Misra and others vs. Railway Board and others that person appointed on ad-hoc basis cannot claim lien on post to which he was so appointed. It was held in case reported in AIR 1994 SC 1808 titled J&K Public Service Commission etc. vs. Dr. Narinder Mohan and others that ad-hoc employee should be replaced as expeditiously as possible by direct recruits. It is held that ad-hoc appointee could be allowed to continue till regular appointees are not available. It was held in case reported in 1995 Supp (3) SCC 363 titled Dr. Kashinath Nagayya Ibatte vs. State of Maharashtra and others that candidates working on ad hoc basis have to give place in accordance with Rules. It is held that ad-hoc appointee could be allowed to continue till regular appointees are not available. It was held in case reported in 1995 Supp (3) SCC 363 titled Dr. Kashinath Nagayya Ibatte vs. State of Maharashtra and others that candidates working on ad hoc basis have to give place in accordance with Rules. It was held in case reported in AIR 1992 SC 2130 titled State of Haryana and others vs. Piara Singh and others that ad-hoc employee should be regularized in accordance with Rules only and it was held that employee should be eligible and fit person to the post. It is well settled law that ad-hoc appointment is temporary appointment pending regular recruitment. It was held by Hon’ble High Court of H.P. in CWP No. 7447 of 2013 decided on dated 4.8.2014 titled Ishwar Chand vs. State of H.P. and others that if no proper procedure was adopted by Parents-Teachers Association for appointment and if appointment was made merely on resolution without conducting any interview of candidates and without giving any notice to general public while appointing them on PTA basis service of appointee should not be regularized. 6. Another submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that various other persons engaged in various schools as language teachers without holding interview of candidates and without notice to general public are continuing in service and on this ground petition be accepted is rejected being devoid of any force for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. Petitioner did not implead other persons as co-respondents who have been engaged in various schools as language teachers without holding any interview and without giving notice to general public. It is well settled law that no one should be condemned unheard on the concept of audi alterm partem. Point No. 1 is answered in negative. Findings on Point No. 2. 7. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that representation was filed by the petitioner before respondent Nos. 4 and 5 i.e. Headmaster Government High School Beetan District Una and President Parents-Teachers Association Government High School Beetan Tehsil Haroli District Una for claiming grant-in-aid but till date representation is not disposed of by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is partly accepted. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 i.e. Headmaster Government High School Beetan District Una and President Parents-Teachers Association Government High School Beetan Tehsil Haroli District Una for claiming grant-in-aid but till date representation is not disposed of by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is partly accepted. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are directed to dispose of the representation of petitioner qua grant-in-aid within one month after receipt of copy of order strictly in accordance with Grant-in-aid to Parents Teachers Association Rules 2006 (Annexure R-1) dated 20.2.2007 issued by the Director of Elementary Education vide notification No. EDN-H(5)C(10)17/2006-PTA (Elementary). Point No. 2 is decided accordingly. 8. In view of above stated facts it is held that:- (1) Prayer of the petitioner to regularize her service as language teacher in Government High School Beetan Tehsil Haroli District Una is declined. (2) Representation of petitioner for grant-in-aid will be disposed of within one month after the receipt of certified copy of this order strictly as per Grant-in-aid to Patents Teachers Association Rules 2006. Petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. All pending miscellaneous applications also stand disposed of.