1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2064 of 2025 Date of decision: 30.06.2025 Anil Patial. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to grant him appointment w.e.f. 14.02.2017, i.e. the date on which other successful candidates, who had applied under different categories for the post of Trained Graduate Teacher (Arts) pursuant to advertisement dated 20.05.2016 were offered appointments. Consequential benefits on that basis have also been prayed. 2. Following facts are not in dispute:- 2(i). Respondents issued an advertisement on 20.05.2016 for filling-up 225 posts of different categories of -2- TGT (Arts), including for Ward of Freedom Fighters. Petitioner applied for the post of TGT (Arts) as Ward of Freedom Fighter. He appeared in the written screening test held on 17.07.2016 and qualified the same. Interview/call letter dated 23.09.2016 was sent to the petitioner by H.P. Staff Selection Commissioner to appear for personal interview on 15.10.2016. The petitioner appeared in the interview on the scheduled date. 2(ii). Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission declared the final result for recruitment against 225 post of TGT (Arts) vide press note dated 21.11.2016. Petitioner’s name figured at Serial No.62 in the list of selected candidates. All candidates, who had been declared successful in terms of the result declared under press note dated 21.11.2016 for different categories, were offered appointment vide office order dated 14.02.2017 (Annexure P- 4). The petitioner, despite having emerged successful against the post reserved for Ward of Freedom Fighter, was not offered appointment to the post of TGT (Arts) by respondent No.2. -3- 2(iii). Appointment was offered to the petitioner against the post of TGT (Arts) [Ward of Freedom Fighter] vide office order dated 03.06.2017. Petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the grievance that all other candidates, who had applied under different categories for the post of TGT (Arts) pursuant to the advertisement, were offered appointment on 14.02.2017. There was no reason for delaying the appointment of the petitioner. The reasons are only attributable to the respondent. In the given facts and circumstances, the petitioner is also entitled to be deemed to have been appointed w.e.f. 14.02.2017, i.e. the date on which other selected candidates were appointed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. 4. Respondents’ defense for delaying the issuance of appointment order in the petitioner’s favour is that matter of appointment of Ward of Ex-servicemen and Ward of Freedom Fighters was pending adjudication in Jyoti Kumari & Ors. -4- vs. The Secretary Education & Anr.1 and also because of State of H.P. & Anr. vs. Jyoti Kumari & Ors.2. The aforesaid decisions do not advance respondents’ defense. The said decisions pertain to some previous selection process undertaken by the respondents for filling up the post of TGT (Medical), whereas the instant selection process was initiated pursuant to an advertisement issued on 20.05.2016. Further, Jyoti Kumari and Others1 pertained to consideration of cases of married daughters, for giving them benefit under the Ward of Ex- servicemen/Freedom Fighter category, whereas, the petitioner is the grandson of Freedom Fighter. Pendency of litigation (Jyoti Kumari and Others1) and decisions therein do not affect the case of the petitioner. His result was not impacted by the said petitions. The respondents had unjustly withheld the appointment of the petitioner for about four months. 5. In the given facts and circumstances, the petitioner is held entitled to deemed/notional appointment as Ward of Freedom Fighter w.e.f. 14.02.2017, i.e. the date 1 CWP No.2958 of 2009 decided on 18.05.2015. 2 LPA No.215 of 2015 decided on 09.01.2020. -5- on which appointment was offered to other selected candidates under the same advertisement and selection process for different categories of TGT (Arts). Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. Petitioner’s deemed date of appointment as TGT (Arts) [Ward of Freedom Fighter] shall be taken as 14.02.2017. The petitioner shall not be entitled to actual monetary benefits for the period w.e.f. 14.02.2017 till the date of his actual joining. However, he shall be entitled to all other consequential benefits at par with the candidates selected under the same advertisement and selection process, including the benefit of regularization of his services. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, to also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 30th June, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)