Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16984 (HP)

SANJAY KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/9734/2025 · 2025-06-17

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9730, 9732 & 9734 of 2025 Date of decision: 17.06.2025 1. CWP No.9730 of 2025 Vinod Kumar. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents. 2. CWP No.9732 of 2025 Kishori Lal. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents. 3. CWP No.9734 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners : Mr. Dheeraj Kanwar, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. -2- 2. These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost identical reliefs. The substantive reliefs in CWP No.9730 of 2025 read as under:- “a. Issue a writ of Mandamus Or other appropriate writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit directing the Respondent to treat the contractual appointment/ service of the petitioner as Primary Assistant Teacher (PAT) w.e.f. 16.11.2005 as regular service with all consequential benefits and thus consequential modify/quash the order dated order dated 16.11.2005 Annexure P-1, as well as 20.08.2020 Annexure P-2 accordingly. b. Issue a writ of Mandamus Or other appropriate writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit directing the Respondent to give the benefit of regular service to the Petitioner with effect from the initial dates of their appointment on contractual terms ( i.e. 16.11.2005) with all consequential benefits, for all intents and purposes along with interest. c. Consequentially Issue a writ of Mandamus Or other appropriate writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, directing the Respondent to consider the service of the Petitioners to be reckoned for seniority and for all terminal benefits as and when they fall due and pay of the Petitioner accordingly be fixed. d. Accordingly Issue a writ of Mandamus Or other appropriate writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, directing the Respondent to pay arrears of salary payable to the Petitioner on regular basis w.e.f. 16.11.2005 and be computed and paid over to them within one month from the date of the order along with interest and all consequential benefits. e. In Alternative Issue a writ of Mandamus Or other appropriate writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstance of the case by directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 19.05.2025 in terms of the law as well as the Judgment dated 22.08.2022 in CWP NO. 1077/2019 (Nitin Kumar vs State of HP),within a time bound manner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case of the petitioners and the reliefs prayed for by them have already been considered & adjudicated upon in Nitin Kumar vs. State of H.P. & Anr.1. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners will be satisfied in case 1Civil Writ Petition (Original Application) No.1077 of 2019 decided on 22.08.2022. -3- they be permitted to prefer fresh representations to respondent No.2/competent authority within a period of two weeks and thereafter, the competent authority be directed to decide the said representation(s) within a time-bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, these writ petitions are disposed of by permitting the petitioners to file representations to respondent No.2/competent authority within a period of two weeks from today. In case such representations are received by respondent No.2/competent authority within the aforesaid period, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Nitin Kumar1 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, to also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 17th June, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)