IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7049 of 2024 Date of Decision: 20.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ Dr. Kavita Kumari …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishwa Bhushan & Ms. Anuja Mehta, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Senior Panel Counsel, for respondent No. 4. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main reliefs:- “a) That the Notification dated 6-10-2017 (Annexure-P/16) and Notification dated 19-9-2018 (Annexure-P/17) vide which the respondent No. 5 was appointed as Associate Professor and Professor on contract basis respectively in SLBSGMC Mandi at Ner Chowk and Notification dated 21-3-2023 (Annexure-P/7) vide which the respondent No. 5 was transferred from SLBSGMC Mandi at Ner Chowk to Dr.RKGMC Hamirpur, being illegal unreasonable, unjustified, invalid, arbitrary, invalid, discriminatory, violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Medical Education Service 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Rules, 1999 (Annexure-P/5) (amended from time to time) and being contrary to the Minimum Qualifications for Teachers in Medical Institutions Regulations, 1998 (Annexure-P/12), may kindly be quashed and set aside. b) That the respondent No. 5 may kindly be held liable to re- pay whole of the amount received by her as contractual pay/salary to the State of Himachal Pradesh w.e.f. 6-9-2016, the date, the respondent No. 5 joined as alleged Associate Professor at Dr. YSPGMC Nahan till date, alongwith interest and the respondents No. 1 to 3 may further be directed to effect recovery of the same amount from the respondent No. 5 alongwith interest.” 2. In nutshell, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that respondent No. 5, Dr. Jyoti Bala could not have been appointed as Professor in the Department of Pathology at Dr. RKGMC, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, for the reason that she does not have any teaching experience as a Senior Resident after her having completed Post- Graduation. 3. Though aforesaid claim of the petitioner has been seriously refuted by respondents No. 1 to 3 by filing reply, but since it is not in dispute that during pendency of the present petition, respondent No. 5, Dr. Jyoti Bala has been removed from the post of Professor in the Department of Pathology, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant petition and accordingly, the same is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. Needless to say, 3 appointment to the post of Professor in the aforesaid department shall be made strictly in accordance with the applicable Recruitment and Promotion Rules. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceeding in appropriate Court of law qua the surviving grievance, if any. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 20, 2025 (sunil)