IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1368/2024 Decided on: 09.09.2026 Shanti Sarup Singh …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Advocate, vice Mr. Parav Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs: - “i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to grant promotion to the petitioner as Principal, School Cadre as recommended by respondent No.2 at Annexure P-4 & P-5, w.e.f. due date with all consequential benefits. ii) That the pension of the petitioner may also be revised after grant of promotion as Principal.” 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 2. When the matter was taken up on 02.09.2026, learned Additional Advocate General placed on record office instructions dated 01.09.2025 issued by the Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, conveying that the petitioner had been promoted to the post of Principal with effect from the date his junior was promoted in the year 2013, vide notification dated 01.08.2025. The said notification reads as under: - “NOTIFICATION On the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee, the Governor, Himachal Pradesh, is pleased to order the promotion of Sh. Shanti Sarup Singh, Retd. Lecturer, having Seniority No. 46, to the post of Principal on a notional basis with effect from the date on which his juniors in the year 2013 were promoted to the post of Principal. He will be entitled to exercise his option(s) for fixation of pay under the provisions of FR-22 within one month. This promotion is subject to the final outcome of CWP No. 2581 of 2019, titled Kalit Puri vs. State of H.P.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has surviving grievance in relation to the implementation of the aforesaid notification in letter and spirit and the release of the benefits flowing to the petitioner thereunder, which, according to the petitioner, have not been granted to him by the respondents. That being so, it is for the petitioner to seek an appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, for the redressal of his surviving grievances. With the above observations, the present writ petition 3 stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 9th September, 2026(rohit)