IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8453 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.10.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Prachi ……...Petitioner Versus Dr. Y. S. Parmar University Horticulture and Forestry and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Piyush Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Kumar, Advocate vice Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs: “a. Direct the respondents to pay the salary of the petitioner for the period w.e.f. 1.9.2024 to 15.9.2024 for which she has worked with respondents: b. Direct the respondents to pay the due salary amount of the petitioner alongwith the 18% interest upto date.” 2. Reply filed by the respondents suggests that after tendering of resignation, petitioner was never permitted to resume her duties in the department concerned, whereas learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner had tendered resignation on 1.8.2024, from the post of Young Professional, but she was not released salary by the head of the department concerned till 15.9.2024 and as such, - 2 - she is entitled to 15 days’ salary. Mr. Rajat Kumar, Advocate vice Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, appearing for the respondents states that admittedly, prior to tendering her resignation, petitioner was working as Young Professional in a project of respondent No.3, but once she had submitted one month’s notice, thereby expressing her intention to leave the project, such prayer of her was accepted on 16.8.2024 w.e.f. 1.8.2024, there was no occasion, if any, for her to work after date. He states that once name of the petitioner was struck off from the rolls of the department w.e.f. 1.8.2024, no pay can be claimed qua the afore period by the petitioner. 3. Since it is quite apparent from the pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties that petitioner herein while issuing one month notice had herself expressed her intention to not work beyond 31.8.2024 and such prayer of her was accepted vide letter dated 16.8.2024 (Annexure R-3) that too w.e.f. 1.8.2024, there appears to be no reason for the petitioner to claim salary for the period of fifteen days that too on the ground that she was not relieved by head of the department concerned. 3. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and accordingly, same is dismissed alongwith pending applications, if any. October 10, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge