The main legal point established in the judgment is that substantial compliance with the requirements of the advertisement and qualification for the post should not be denied based on technicalities, and the rejection of candidature should be in line with constitutional provisions.

JUDGMENT

Satyen Vaidya, J. - Petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking following substantive reliefs: -

"(i) To quash and set-aside Annexure P-VI i.e. notice for information dated 01.06.2021 qua petitioner whereby the recommendation of the petitioner has been kept on hold by the commission.

(ii) To direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner for the post of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II (post code 776) in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(iii) To direct the respondents to keep Annexure PVII dated 18.06.2021 in abeyance till the final outcome of present Civil Writ Petition and further not to give appointment to any candidate as per Annexure P-VII."

CASE OF PETITIONER:

2. The facts as alleged in the petition are that respondent No.1 issued Advertisement No.36-1/2020 on 02.03.2020, for selection to different categories of posts. One of such post being of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II in the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Himachal Pradesh. Total 154 numbers of posts in this category were advertised, out of which, 56 posts were for General (UR) Category. Minimum qualification prescribed for the said post was as under: -

"i) 10+2 in Science from a recognized Board of School Education.

ii. B.Sc. Medical Laboratory Technology/B.Sc. Medical Technology Laboratory/ B.Sc. Medical Technology (Laboratory)/B.Sc. Medial Laboratory Sciences/B.Sc. in Medical Laboratory Technology (Lateral) from a recognized University or an Institute affiliated to a recognized University.

iii) Should be registered with the Himachal Pradesh Para Medical Council for the above qualification."

3. As per petitioner, she was having all the qualifications for the post of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II. Petitioner had passed her 10+2 examination in 2014. She had also passed B.Sc. in Medical Technology from Himachal Pradesh University in November, 2018. Petitioner further claimed to have registered herself with H.P. Para Medical Council ("Council" for brevity) on 21.01.2019.

4. In response to above noted advertisement, petitioner applied for the post of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II within stipulated time period. Extended last date for submission of the application was dated 05.06.2020. Petitioner appeared in the written examination conducted on dated 29.11.2020 under Roll No.776001263. She scored 44.50 marks in the written examination. On 04.03.2021, petitioner received communication from respondent No.1 informing her that she had found place in the list of short-listed candidates for undertaking the evaluation process to be held on 15.03.2021. Petitioner was required to bring original documents with attested copies.

5. Before the date of evaluation, petitioner approached respondent No.2 for registration certificate. On 08.03.2021, respondent No.2 again issued provisional registration certificate in favour of the petitioner.

6. Petitioner appeared with all requisite certificates alongwith registration certificate issued by respondent No.3 on the date of evaluation and submitted all the documents.

7. On dated 20.05.2021, respondent No.1 declared a list of 86 successful candidates, however, the name of petitioner was not included therein. Since certain representations were received by respondent No.1 raising issues of registration with respondent No.1, result was kept on hold and was finally published on 18.6.2021. Total 91 candidates were declared successful. Petitioner did not find her name in the list of successful candidates and after enquiry she found that her candidature was rejected on the ground that she did not possess valid registration certificate from respondent No.3 prior to dated 05.06.2020.

CASE OF RESPONDENTS:

8. Respondent No.1 in its reply has submitted that the candidature of petitioner was rightly rejected as condition of the advertisement was not fulfilled by her. As per advertisement, eligibility of the candidates was to be seen on the closing date fixed for receipt of onlin