IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6 of 2022 Decided on: 24.06.2026 Ajit Singh Diwan … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & another … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. [ Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner: Mr. Parav Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “i) That the impugned rejection at Annexure P-4 may kindly be quashed and set aside and further respondents may kindly be directed to implement the judgement dated 21/10/2012 rendered by the Hon'ble High Court of SO Himachal Pradesh in CWP (T) No. 8920/2008 at Annexure P-1 and the judgement passed in OA No. 7423/2018 at Annexure P-3 in its true letter and spirit and grant promotion to the petitioner as lecturer in sociology w.e.f. his due date and revise his retiral benefits accordingly, in the interest of the justice. An appropriate writ, order or direction may kindly be issued in the favour of the petitioner.” 2. When this case listed on 02.03.2026, the following order was passed:- “The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the fact that he has not been promoted from the post of TGT to the post of Lecturer School Cadre in the subject of Sociology. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 In terms of Annexure P-4, which is an order passed in the month of March, 2019, the stand of the respondents is that as on the day when the petitioner retired from Government service i.e., 31.05.2006, no TGT in general category junior to the petitioner was promoted as Lecturer School Cadre in the subject of Sociology. To rebut this fact, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure P-5 and has submitted that Sh. Subharsh Khanna mentioned at serial No.1 therein appears to be junior to the petitioner. He further submits that this is the only basis on which the petitioner is agitating the stand of the respondents. In order to ascertain this fact as to whether Sh. Subharsh Khanna, who finds mentioned in Annexure P-4 was junior to the petitioner or not, learned Deputy Advocate General to have instructions and also to produced the relevant record. 3. Today, in compliance to the said order, learned Additional Advocate General has handed over instructions, received from Director of School Education, to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which read as under:- “I have the honour to refer to above titled CWP which is pending adjudication before this Hon'ble Court. This case was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 22/06/2026 when the following directions were passed:- "On the request of learned Additional Advocate General, list on 24.06.2026 to enable him to have instructions in terms of order dated 02.03.2026" In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that as per directions passed by the Hon'ble High Court, the case of the petitioner was examined and it was found that no 3 junior were promoted and 09 TGTs shown by applicant in promotion order dated 11/05/2000 are much senior to applicant as applicant has been allowed notional promotion as TGT w.e.f. 31/12/1988 and last promotee in promotion order dated 11/05/2000 of General Category was appointed as TGT in the year 23/04/1975. All are much senior to petitioner. Smt. Subharsh Khanna is TGT appointee of 23/03/1971 and petitioner being TGT of 31/12/1988 has no parity with her. It is, therefore, requested that Hon'ble Court may kindly be apprised accordingly and four weeks more time be prayed on the next date of hearing.” 4. In light of these instructions, as it is apparent and evident that Smt. Subharsh Khanna was indeed appointed as a TGT on 23.03.1971, whereas the petitioner was appointed as such only on 31.12.1988, the petitioner has not been able to establish that any person junior to him indeed was promoted before him. It appears that the petitioner was under the impression that Smt. Subharsh Khanna had joined as a JBT on 23.03.1971, whereas in terms of the instructions imparted, she had joined as a TGT, which demonstrates that she was senior to the petitioner as far as the appointment as TGT is concerned. 5. In light of said fact, as no relief can be granted to the petitioner, present petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge June 24, 2026 4 (Rishi)