The Court made the observation while dealing with a petition challenging the rejection of a woman's candidature for the post of Van Mitra, after she married during the pendency of the selection process. It held that her eligibility had to be assessed with reference to the date of her application and that her subsequent change in marital status could not, by itself, disentitle her from appointment.

Justice Ajay Mohan Goel remarked that: there is no law in this country which ordinarily says that if an unmarried lady applies for a post, then she is under legal obligation not to change her marital status till the recruitment process is over that too for posts like Van Mitra

Background:

The Himachal Pradesh Forest Department invited applications for engagement as Van Mitra, with December 30, 2023 as the last date. Nitu Kumari applied for the post for Drang Beat and was ranked first after clearing the physical efficiency test.

During the recruitment process, she married in March 2024. By the time her documents were verified in November 2024, she had shifted to her husband's village and was no longer listed as part of a BPL family in her parental Gram Panchayat. The Department consequently denied her the relevant marks and selected another candidate for the post.

Aggrieved, Nitu Kumari approached the High Court challenging the rejection of her candidature and the appointment of the other candidate.

The High Court held that the petitioner's candidature could not be rejected merely because she married during the recruitment process. Since she was eligible when she applied, her eligibility had to be assessed as on the date of her application.

The Court observed that the Department had taken nearly a year to verify the candidates' documents and could not expect the petitioner to remain unmarried until the recruitment process was completed. Her change in marital status could not deprive her of the benefit of the status she held when she applied.

As the petitioner was the most meritorious candidate for Drang Beat, the Court held that the rejection of her candidature was bad in law. It quashed the rejection and directed the authorities to appoint her as Van Mitra with effect from the date the other selected candidates were appointed, along with consequential monetary and seniority benefits.

However, the Court did not disturb the appointment of the private respondent, noting that she was not at fault. The Department was directed to either continue her in the same Beat or adjust her to another nearby Beat.

Case Name:Nitu Kuamri v/s State of H.P. & Ors.

Case No.: CWP No.7895 of 2025

Date of Decision: 03.08.2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order