Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 466 (HP)

Om Prakash v. State of H. P.

2014-04-25

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY, SANJAY KAROL

body2014
JUDGMENT Per Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) Result in the sealed cover was produced before us. The same was opened and perused by us. We find that the petitioner has qualified his written examination. 2. We find that the petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the earlier decision rendered by a Co ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 5084 of 2012 titled as Amit Prarthi Vs. State of H.P. and another, wherein the following observations were made:- “3 All the petitioners have a post graduate degree in Physical Education. All the petitioners also have M.Phil from the Himachal Pradesh University in Physical Education and it is submitted that some of them are also pursuing Ph.D in Physical Education. As per the prescribed qualification, a candidate with the subject of Physical Education as an elective subject with 50% marks in Physical Education is qualified. If that be so, it is submitted that all of them are far superior in terms of the prescribed qualification, if the same is to be understood in terms of the object sought to be achieved. 4. Rule 18 of the R&P Rules reads as follows:- “18. Power to relax: Where the State Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient to do so, it may be order for reasons to be recorded in writing and in consultation with the H.P. Public Service Commission/subordinates Selection Board to relax any of the provisions of these rules with respect to any class or category or person or post.” 5. That power of relaxation is reserved to the Government to be invoked in situations like this. Having regard to the purpose of the Rules, the Subordinate Selection Board cannot be faulted in not recommending the names of the petitioners since they can only go by the prescribed qualification and the matter is to be considered by the State Government in terms of Rule 18, which is extracted as above. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of as follows:- 6. the petitioners may either individually or collectively file appropriate representation before the Government – Secretary (Education) within a week from today. The Government shall consider the matter in the light of the observations made by us in this judgment invoking the power under Rule 18. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of as follows:- 6. the petitioners may either individually or collectively file appropriate representation before the Government – Secretary (Education) within a week from today. The Government shall consider the matter in the light of the observations made by us in this judgment invoking the power under Rule 18. Since this power is to be invoked in terms of the Rules and as per the direction by this Court, we make it clear that the Government in considering the matter in terms of the purpose of the Rules in these cases. Orders, as above, shall be passed by the Government within a month. Till orders are passed, as above, there will be a direction to the respondents to keep vacant four posts of Physical Education Teachers.” 3. Undisputedly, petitioner has acquired higher qualification i.e. M.Phil, Physical Education. As such, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the State Government to relax the relevant Rule 18. This shall positively be done within a period of three weeks from today. Till such decision is taken, one post of Physical Education Teacher shall be kept vacant. The result of the petitioner be declared, in accordance with law, after necessary action is taken by the State Government. The pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.