IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 11326 of 2024 Decided on 22.6.2026 Mohinder Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Bhim Raj Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That the impugned orders dated 29.07.2024 as Annexure P-3 & P-4, may kindly be quashed and set-aside; (ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to restore the seniority of the petitioner as existed in the combined seniority list dated 16-10-2009; (iii) That the seniority and thereby consequential benefits may also be considered in favour of the petitioner; (iv) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to produce the entire record of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.” 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 29.7.2024 (Annexure P-3) in terms whereof one Balbir Singh, PET, GHS Tandi u/c Government Senior Secondary School, Pujali was deputed to the office of Deputy Directory Elementary Education, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P., to execute the smooth functioning of sports activities in the District being the Seniormost PET without TTA/Joining time. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the order dated 29.7.2024 (Annexure P-4) in terms whereof, the seniority of the petitioner has been ordered to read “seniority No. 592-A” instead of seniority No. 520 in respect of the petitioner. 3. A perusal of the memo of parties demonstrates that despite the fact that there is a prayer for quashing of Annexure P-3 dated 29.7.2024, Shri Balbir Singh was not impleaded as party- respondent, though he was a necessary party, as any relief granted to the petitioner would adversely affected the said individual. Therefore, as far as this relief is concerned, the petition is obviously bad for non joinder of necessary parties. 4. With regard to Annexure P-4, in the light of the fact that the petitioner has filed a representation with the authority in this regard, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the representation filed by the petitioner (Annexure P-5) be decided by 2 the authority concerned within a period of eight weeks from today. 5. With these observations, the instant petition is disposed of,so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge June 22, 2026 (Guleria) 3