Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4625 of 2025 Date of Decision: 25.04.2025 __________________________________________________________ Dr. Komalpreet Kaur …….Petitioner Versus Union of India and Others
….Respondents __________________________________________________________
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): When this case was taken up for consideration today, the Court was informed that Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in similar cases has passed the following order:-
“1. It is not in dispute that the similar issue, as involved in the instant petition, is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.36359 of 2016.
2. In the given facts and circumstances, we dispose of this petition by directing that the instant petition shall abide by the decision of SLP(C) No.36359 of 2016 pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
3. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.”
2.
Learned counsel for the parties submit that the Writ petition can also be disposed of by passing the same order.
3. Accordingly, as agreed, this petition is disposed of by observing that in view of the fact that similar issue is pending 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 adjudication before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No.36359 of 2016, it is directed that the present petition shall abide by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.36359 of 2016. The petitioner if engaged by virtue of the orders passed by this Court, shall continue to get the protection of the orders, till the adjudication of the matter by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India or till he superannuate as per the Policy, whichever is earlier. The parties shall be at liberty to approach this Court in case any clarification or modification of this order is required. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge April 25, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)