KUSUM LATA AND OTHERS v. RAKESH KANWAR AND ANOTHER
CMP/20993/2025 · 2026-04-08
Sushil Kukreja
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1538 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1538 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Kusum Lata Vs. Rakesh Kanwar & Anr.
CMP No. 20993/2025 in COPC No. 683/2025 08.04.2026 Present: Mr. Shashwat Dadwal, Advocate, for the applicants/petitioners. Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents/State. Counter affidavit has not been filed despite opportunity granted to the applicants/petitioners in this regard. Therefore, right to file the same stands closed. Vide judgment dated 25.04.2025, the respondents were directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioners, within a period of four weeks. As per compliance affidavit, the case of the petitioners has been considered and rejected. The relevant portion of compliance affidavit reads as under:-
“4. That in compliance to the Hon’ble High Court order dated 30.12.2025, the case of the petitioners alongwith other Assistant Librarians were considered. In order to implement the orders of the Hon’ble High Court the Departmental Promotion Committee was constituted vide this Directorate office order dated 02.01.2026……….
5. That the proposal for awarding of Pay Band-IV alongwith service record, relevant R & P Rules and UGC guidelines in respect of 105 Assistant Librarians were placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting held on 03.01.2026……..
6. That the Departmental Promotion Committee after perusing the case of the petitioner and other Assistant Librarians as per Himachal Pradesh Education Department Librarian Recruitment & Promotion Rules 2011 notified on 19.08.2011, who have been allowed the Pay Band-IV by the Hon’ble High Court, has given recommendation that none of the Assistant Librarian
...2… fulfills the terms and conditions for award of Pay Band- IV as per the guidelines issued by the UGC, R & P Rules applicable to them and other terms & conditions for award of Pay Band-IV……..” In this view of the matter, no further orders are required to be passed in the present proceeding and the application seeking revival of contempt petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to assail the consideration order in accordance with law, if they are still aggrieved. ( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge 8th April, 2026 (raman)