IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.17146 of 2025 Decided on 16th April 2026 Smt. Dakshina Gupta …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Ashir Kaith, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.P. Singh, Deputy Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “a) That the respondents may kindly be directed to credit the earned leave in the leave account of the petitioner admissible to them due to retrospective regularization of her service with all financial benefits. b) That impugned order dated 28.08.2024, Annexure P-4, to the extent of ‘grant of earned leaves without financial benefits’ may be quashed and set aside. Consequently, the petitioner may be held entitled for similar benefits as granted by this Hon’ble Court in CWP No.8282 of 2025 titled Anita Kumari versus State of H.P. & Ors., Annexure P-5.” 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to judgment dated 15.07.2025, passed by the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.8382 of 2025, titled Anita Kumari versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others and submitted that the issue raised in this petition is no more res-integra and the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench has been pleased to hold that the benefit of earned leave is not to be notional but with actual financial benefits. 3. Having carefully gone through the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench, this Court concurs with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. In the present case, the services of the petitioner, though were earlier regularized w.e.f. 07.04.2015, but thereafter in light of adjudication in her favour of the petitioner, her services were ordered to be regularized retrospectively w.e.f. 01.01.2007. In terms of Annexure P-4, the representation of the petitioner was disposed of by holding that her case was covered by the judgment dated 08.08.2023, passed by this Court in CWP No.5043 of 2022, titled Sunita Sangroli versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others and she was held 3 entitled to the credit of the earned leave from the initial date of regularization, but, without any financial benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that though in terms of Annexure P-4, the Authority directed the Principal concerned to credit the earned leave of the petitioner from initial date of her regularization, but, without any financial benefits, which is bad in law, because, this Court in Anita Kumari versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others (supra), in similar circumstances, has been pleased to hold that when the Department does not dispute an incumbent’s entitlement to earned leave during period of retrospective regularization on the service of said incumbent, the financial benefits attached thereto shall follow, but of course, subject to maximum of 300 earned leaves during entire service career of the incumbent. 5. Learned Deputy Advocate General, though, has submitted that the judgment being relied to by learned counsel for the petitioner, being a matter of record, is not disputed by the State, but, it be observed that the judgment of this Court will be subject to the right of the State to assail the same in accordance with law. 4 6. As the prayer made by the petitioner, to the effect that the earned leave to which she is entitled on account of her retrospective regularization, alongwith financial benefits, is directly covered by the judgment dated 15.07.2025, passed by the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.8382 of 2025, titled Anita Kumari versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, this petition is disposed of with the observation that the findings returned therein on this issue shall be construed to have been passed in the present case also by holding that the petitioner shall be entitled to actual financial benefits vis-à-vis the earned leave, subject to the maximum of 300 earned leaves in the entire career. This is of course subject to the right of the State to assail the said judgment in accordance with law, if so advised. 7. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge April 16, 2026 (Vinod)