IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
2026:HHC:16270
CWP No. 6336 of 2023
Baby Rani …….Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents
For the petitioner u: Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Assistant Advocate Generalfor respondent No. 1.: Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Decided on: 12.05.2026
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
May 12, 2026
(narender)
2026:HHC:16270 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 6336 of 2023 Decided on: 12.05.2026
Baby Rani …….Petitioner
Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents
Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Moha n Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes _____________________________________________________
For the petitioner u: Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General
for respondent No. 1.
: Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:-
“i) That a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to recommend the name of the petitioner for appointment in pursuance to Annexure P-4 and as per rules per rule ix of
respondent No.2, may be issued.
ii) That a time-bound direction may be given to respondent No. 2 to send the sponsor the name of the petitioners
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2026 01:12:18 :::CIS
##PAGE2##2
2026:HHC:16270 forthwith.”
2. The issue involved in this case is in a very narrow compass. Process was initiated by the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission to fill up ceortain posts of Assistant District Attorneys. In terms of the sa id process, 24 posts of Assistant District Attorneys were to be filled in, including one post reserved for Scheduled Caste catuegory. The petitioner applied for the post under
the said category.
3. In terms of the final result declared by the Authorities, one Ms. Babita Dhiman was selected against the Scheduled Caste category candidate. According to the petitioner, she was next in merit as far as Scheduled Caste category candidates were concerned. 4. Her grievance is that after the name of Ms. Babita
HDhiman was recommended by the Public Service Commission to the employer and appointment was offered to her, Ms. Babita Dhiman joined the post and thereafter tendered her resignation. Thereafter, the petitioner staked her claim to be appointed against the said post,
but appointment has not been offered to her.
5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that it is not in dispute that petitioner was No. 2 in the order of merit after Ms. Babita Dhiman as far as Scheduled Caste
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2026 01:12:18 :::CIS
##PAGE3##3
2026:HHC:16270
candidates are concerned. He submitted that it is a matter of record that Ms. Babita Dhiman, after joining the post, tendered her resignation and vacated the post. He submitted that therefore the act of the respondents of not offering the post to the candidate who is next in line of merit is no t sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, learned Senior Counsel submitted that a mandamus be issued to the respondents, directing them to offer the unfilled post to
the present petoitioner.
6. Learned Counsel for the Public Service Commission referred to the reply filed by the Commission and submitted that in thhe present case, it is not as if the selected candidate did not join the post in issue and the post remained unfilled. He submitted that after the name of the Ms. Babita Dhiman was recommended by the Public Service Commission, she was offered appointment. She joined the post on the basis of said appointment letter but later tendered her resignation. Learned Counsel submitted that above facts demonstrate that it is not as if the seat remained unfilled. It was occupied by the selected candidate and thus the post stood exhausted. He submitted that the subsequent resignation tendered by the selected candidate is of no help to the petitioner because once the seat stood exhausted, as per rule, it could not be offered to the
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2026 01:12:18 :::CIS
##PAGE4##4
2026:HHC:16270
next candidate in merit as per the earlier process. Learned Counsel also referred to
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.