Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 30951 (HP)

YUSSUFF ALI v. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/2746/2020 · 2025-10-10

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2746/2020 Decided on: 10.10.2025 Yussuff Ali …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate, vice counsel. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J CMP No.24200/2025 For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and disposed of. CWP No. 2746/2020 2. Even though reply has not been filed by the respondents, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs: - 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 “(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay honorarium to the petitioner as per the Parents Teacher Association Policy for the post of lecturer in English at Government Senior Secondary School, Daloh, Tehsil Amb, District Una, H.P. for the period of 194 days along with interest @9% till the final realization of the payment. (ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider/count the period i.e. 194 days for counting the seven year continue service and for granting all other benefits like seniority, contract, regularization as per policy.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issues involved in this writ petition are no longer res-integra and are squarely covered by the decision rendered in Raman Kumari Versus State of H.P. & Ors. & Anr.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner would be content, in case, respondents are directed to consider his case for redressing the grievance raised by him in this writ petition, in accordance with law and in terms of above decision within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 5. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the 2 CWP No. 376/2019, decided along with connected matters on 16.05.2019 3 date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 10th October, 2025(rohit)