1 2025:HHC:29062 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA LPA No. 163 of 2024 Date of Decision : 27.08.2025 ________________________________________________________ H.P. University …..Appellant Versus Reena Kumari & others ….Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ For the Appellant Mr. Devender Kumar Sharma, For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate. G.S. Sandhawalia , Chief Justice (Oral) The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 29.04.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 3143 of 2019, Smt. Reena Kumari versus H.P. University. The learned Single Judge quashed the order dated 26.09.2019 (Annexure P-11), whereby the salary of the employees as such was directed to be maintained on 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 account of the fact that the matter had been placed before the Finance Committee/Executive Council for consideration on account of regularization granted to them on the post of Calligraphist vide Office Order dated 18.06.2019 (Annexure P-5). 2. The learned Single Judge was of the considered opinion that once the benefit had been granted, the adhoc arrangement as such, which had been made by the appellant-University, was not justified and denial of wages in terms of the said order was not sustainable. 3. However, the learned Single Judge had held that he was not adjudicating upon the illegality of the regularization order dated 18.06.2019 (Annexure P-5) and accordingly, directed that the remuneration be paid to the employees from the month of May, 2024 onwards. 4. Apparently, an interim order dated 30.10.2019 was passed in the Writ Petition by the Co- ordinate Bench, at the initial stage, that if the salary was due and admissible to the writ petitioners, the 3 same be paid in the meanwhile, so directions were given to pay from May, 2024 onwards. 5. It has been brought to our notice that vide order of even date 29.06.2024, the benefit of regularization has now been shifted to 01.01.2022 after completion of two years’ contractual service and directions were issued to pay the arrears of the salary on account of their pay fixation according to the HP Government norms due to which the learned Single Judge did not address on the said issue. The said order reads as under:- "OFFICE ORDER" In pursuance to the recommendations of the Finance Committee vide Res. No. 30 In Its meeting held on 16.06.2020 and approved by the Executive Council vide Res. No. 22 dated 30.06.2020, and further recommendations of the Screening Committee in its meeting held on 18.06.2024, the Vice Chancellor is pleased to put the services of following Calligraphists on Contract Basis w.e.f. 18.06.2019 by withdrawing the office order of even number dated 18.05.2019:- 4 1.Ms. Reena Kumari D/o Sh. Jagat Ram 2.Ms. Reena Kumari, D/o Sh. Ramesh Kumar 3. Ms. Pushpa Devi, D/o Sh. Kedar Singh Further, in pursuance to instructions issued by Department of Personnel (AP-III) vide letter No. PER(AP)C-B(2)-1/2019 dated 28.12.2021 adopted by this University vide notification No. 9-30/2000-HPU(Genl.) Vol.-II dated 29.12.2021, the services of these contractual employees are regularized w.e.f 01.01.2022 after completion of two years contractual service. However, the arrears of the salary on account of their pay fixation shall be paid according to HP Government norms. sd/- Registrar” 6. Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that they are in the process of challenging the said order and their right has been adversely affected as the date of regularization has been advanced by three years. 7. It has also been brought to our notice that the amount which was directed to be paid to the employees by the learned Single Judge, has also been disbursed due to the filing of the Execution Petition. 5 8. Keeping in view the above, it is apparent that the order as such passed by the learned Single Judge was only to protect the interests of the employees during the pendency of the recommendations to be received by the Finance Committee which have now been approved by the Executive Council. 9. In such circumstances, we dispose of the present appeal having been rendered infructuous, with liberty to the employees as such to challenge the subsequent order, in accordance with law. 10. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice. August 27, 2025 (Ranjan Sharma) (hemlata) Judge.