IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWPOA No.1799 of 2019 Decided on : 14.11.2025 _______________________________________________________

Manglu Ram ...Pe.titioner versus H State of Himachal Pradesh and others ...Respondents Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

1Whether approved for reporting? No For the petitioner: rMr. Sanjay Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents-State.

Ranjan Sharma, Judge Petitioner, Manglu Ram, initially filed a writ petition CWP No.2688/2012 which was transferred to Learned State Administrative Tribunal and abolition of Tribunal, the matter transferred to this Court as CWPOA No.1799 of 2019 seeking the following relief:-

“That the respondents may kindly be directed to offer the appointment to the post of T.G.T. (Arts) to the petitioners.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Grievance is that the petitioner belongs to IRDP and Schedule Tribe Category and he passed his Graduation in Arts in April 1999 and Master in Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Political Science in June 2002. Petitioner is a physically challenged, being suffering from locomotive impairment to the extent of 45% as per Annexure P-3. He had passed Bachelors of Education Examination (B.Ed) from University of Gauhati on 04.05.2005 [Annexure P-5].

2(i). It is averred that the State Authorities received to convey out special drive for recruitment challenged or uvisually impaired, hearing impaired on those suoffering from permanent disability in August- SepteCmber 2008. For this, an Advertisement- Recruitment Notice was issued in the month of August-September 2008 [Annexure P-6], whereby, out of total 52 posts to be filled by batch-wise selection, 9 H posts of T.G.T (Arts) were meant for SC-specially abled candidates for various sub categories and three posts were meant to be filled for persons with locomotive- orthopedic challenged persons, in-addition to batch- wise recruitment, the recruitment notice issued in August-September 2008 [Annexure P-6] reveals that 50 posts of lectures were to be filled by direct recruitment from specially abled persons and 8 posts of TGT (Arts) were stated to be filled up and out of this, three posts were meant for persons suffering from locomotive impairment (Orthopedic).

2(ii). It is averred that in pursuance to the advertisement issued in August, September, 2008 [Annexure P-6], the Director of Elementary Education issued a letter in March 2011 (Annexure P-7) calling the petitioner for interview for post of T.G.T. (Arts) under the physically handicapped quota. Though, the petitioner appeuared in interview on 21.04.2011, but despite hiso eligibility, the respondents have not granted the apCpointment to the petitioner against the posts of TGT(Arts) neither under the batch-wise recruitment nor against direct recruitment posts, which was illegal and unconstitutional.

STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES-

RESPONDENTS IN THE REPLY-AFFIDAVIT:

3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice, by this Court on 26.04.2012, the State Authorities have filed the Reply-Affidavit dated 24.05.2012, of Director of Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh.

3(i). Reply-Affidavit indicates that so far as the recruitment notice issued for batch wise recruitment is concerned, the petitioner did not fall in seniority as per the batch wise norms, for the reason, that the petitioner had passed his B.Ed. Examination on 30.03.2005, whereas, the last candidate who was selected on the basis of batch wise seniority, had passed B.Ed on 20.07.2000, who figured at serial No.9 of the merit list, whereas the petitioner figured much below at seniority No.91, against the posts of TGT (Arts) reserved for PHH (Orthopedically Disabled Candidates) under batch-wise selection.

3(ii). So far as, the claim of the petitioner for appoinotment as T.G.T (Arts) against the merit/ selectCion posts as in the recruitment notice, the Reply- Affidavit states that though the petitioner had appeared i