The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of a Part-Time Multi Task Worker in a government primary school, ruling that the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) does not prohibit a person above the age of 14 from pursuing Class 8 education.
Justice Ajay Mohan Goel held that the petitioner failed to prove that the selected candidate’s Class 8 certificate was fraudulent or invalid, and therefore the appointment could not be set aside.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Slams UP Officials Over Namaz Restriction in Sambhal During Ramzan
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from the recruitment process for the post of Part Time Multi Task Worker (PTMTW) at Government Primary School Rajaina in Sirmour district, Himachal Pradesh.
The private respondent was selected for the post in August 2023. The petitioner, who had also participated in the selection process, challenged the appointment claiming that the selected candidate had obtained his Class 8 certificate illegally.
According to the petitioner, the selected candidate had earlier failed Class 8 in a government school in 2008 and later secured a Class 8 certificate from a private school in Chamba during the 2011–12 academic session. The petitioner argued that this was done in violation of the provisions of the RTE Act, which defines a “child” as a person between the ages of six and fourteen.
He claimed that since the candidate was older than 14 years when he passed Class 8 from the private school, the certificate should be treated as invalid.
The petitioner first filed an appeal before the competent authority under the Part Time Multi Task Workers Scheme, 2020.
After examining the records and hearing both parties, the authority rejected the appeal and held that the certificate submitted by the selected candidate appeared genuine and there was no legal restriction preventing a person from continuing education after the age of 14.
The petitioner then filed another appeal before the Director of School Education, who also dismissed the challenge.
During verification, the Block Elementary Education Officer wrote to the principal of the private school in Chamba to confirm the authenticity of the certificate. The school verified that the certificate details matched their records.
The Director concluded that there was no evidence showing the certificate was fake or illegally obtained.
Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that the appointment was illegal because it was based on a certificate obtained in violation of the RTE Act.
Counsel for the petitioner contended that since the candidate had crossed the age of 14 at the time he obtained the Class 8 certificate, the certificate should not be recognized and the appointment made on that basis was void.
On the other hand, the State government argued that both authorities had carefully examined the issue and verified the certificate. The State submitted that the petitioner had not produced any evidence proving that the certificate was fabricated.
The government further argued that the RTE Act only ensures free and compulsory education for children aged 6-14 but does not prohibit anyone older from continuing their studies.
The High Court closely examined the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and clarified its purpose.
Justice Goel noted that the law was enacted to ensure free and compulsory education for children aged six to fourteen, primarily to remove financial barriers that might prevent children from completing eight years of schooling.
However, the Court said the Act does not create a restriction preventing someone above the age of 14 from enrolling in Class 8 or continuing their education.
The Court also emphasized that the petitioner had only made allegations without presenting any evidence to prove that the certificate was fraudulent.
The bench observed:
“There is no statutory bar that a person above the age of fourteen years cannot be admitted in Class 8 in any school.”
The Court further noted that the authorities had already verified the certificate with the issuing school and confirmed its authenticity.
After considering the submissions and the record, the High Court concluded that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any illegality in the certificate or the appointment process.
Justice Ajay Mohan Goel therefore dismissed the writ petition, upholding the orders passed by the appellate authorities and the appointment of the selected candidate as a Part-Time Multi Task Worker.
All pending applications were also disposed of.
Case Title: Pankaj Chauhan vs State of Himachal Pradesh & Others
Case No.: CWP No. 20062 of 2025
Decision Date: 27 February 2026
