Since common questions of facts as well as law are involved in
both the above-captioned cases, this Court heard them together and the
same are now being disposed of vide common judgment.
2. Relevant facts, which are otherwise common in both the cases,
are that petitioner herein was appointed as a Home Guard in 7 th Battalion
of Home Guards at Kullu in the month of September, 2012. In 2015, he
was promoted as Section Leader. On 1.11.2016, petitioner was further
promoted as Havildar. On 19.11.2020, one post of Havildar
Instructor/Quarter Master Havildar was advertised by respondent No. 4,
vide advertisement dated 19.11.2020 (Annexure P-2). Being eligible, both
petitioner as well as respondent No. 5, who alongwith petitioner, was also
working as a Home Guard, applied for the post of Havildar
Instructor/Quarter Master Havildar. Though both the petitioner and
respondent No. 5 participated in selection process, however, vide press note
dated 26.11.2021 (Annexure P-8), respondent No. 5 was recommended for
appointment against the post of Havildar Instructor/Quarter Master
Havildar. Pursuant to his selection, respondent No. 5 was offered
appointment against the post in question, vide appointment letter dated