IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3035 of 2024 Date of Decision: 22.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ Suneel Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 Yes. For the Petitioner: Mr. Yash Vardhan Singh and Mr. Amrick Singh, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs:- “a) That respondents may kindly be directed to grant the petitioner notional appointment from the due date of his initial selection on 15.06.2004 and consequently grant him seniority from such date; b) That respondents many kindly be directed to consider the petitioner’s service case for regularization in service as DPE and for enhancement of pay.” 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties, are that the Department of Education, Himachal Pradesh, conducted interviews in the month of November, 2003 for 14 posts i.e. 12 P.E.T. and 02 D.P.E. as per Para Teacher Policy, 2003. Petitioner herein alongwith other eligible candidates also participated in the selection process. Interview was held under the Chairmanship of Sub Divisional Magistrate(Civil) Sadar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, wherein petitioner alongwith two other candidates was selected, as is evident from communication dated 15.06.2004 (Annexure P-1). Vide aforesaid communication dated 15.06.2004, the Sub Divisional Magistrate (Civil)Sadar, District Mandi, apprised the Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh that petitioner stands selected against the post of D.P.E at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar. Though, petitioner vide aforesaid communication was selected against the post of D.P.E., but he was not given posting in the school concerned on the ground that no post was lying vacant in the institution. Though, repeatedly, petitioner made representations to the Sub Divisional Magistrate as well as 3 Principal of the school concerned for his appointment, but since needful was not done, he approached this Court by way of CWP No. 2351 of 2012, but before same could be decided on its own merit, H.P. State Administrative Tribunal came to be constituted, as a result thereof, afore case was transferred to learned Tribunal. However, for bad luck of the petitioner, learned Tribunal was abolished in the year 2019, as a result thereof, petition having been filed by the petitioner was again transferred to this Court in the year, 2019 and same was re-registered as CWPOA No. 1269 of 2019. This Court vide judgment dated 04.01.2020 allowed the aforesaid writ petition, thereby directing the respondents to appoint petitioner against the Post of D.P.E. at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva Badar forthwith (Annexure P-3). 3. Though, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment passed by this Court, respondent-State preferred Letters Patent Appeal bearing LPA No.59 of 2021, titled State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Sunil Kumar and others, but same was dismissed vide judgment dated 25.05.2022(Annexure P-4). Once judgment dated 04.01.2020 passed by this Court in CWPOA No. 1269 of 2019 attained 4 finality, petitioner herein was given appointment vide order dated 30th August, 2022 (Annexure P-5) and since then he has been working against the post of D.P.E., at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar. 4. Now, the precise grouse of the petitioner at this juncture as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Yash Vardhan Singh, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that since this Court vide judgment dated 04.01.2020 passed in CWPOA No. 1269 of 2019, had categorically ruled that selection of the petitioner made in terms of communication dated 15.06.2004(Annexure P-1) still holds good and on the basis of aforesaid selection, petitioner herein was subsequently given appointment vide order dated 30th August, 2022 (Annexure P-5), petitioner herein is entitled to be given benefit of the service w.e.f. 2008, especially when it specifically came to be admitted by the respondents, as has been recorded in CWPOA No. 1269 of 2019 that post of D.P.E had fallen vacant on 15.06.2008 at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar on account of transfer of one Sh. Jiva Nand. 5 5. Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions of the petitioner, who is present in Court, fairly stated that petitioner is ready and willing to forgo all monetary benefits qua afore period, but such period may be counted notionally, so that petitioner becomes eligible for regularization in terms of policy framed by the Government of Himachal Pradesh from time to time. 6. To the contrary, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondents, though fairly admitted the facts as have been recorded hereinabove, but attempted to refute the claim of the petitioner on the ground that since petitioner joined against the post in question in the year, 2022 and prior to afore date, he never worked against the post in question, there is no question, if any, for grant of notional benefits as are being prayed for. He further submitted that otherwise also, prayer made on behalf of the petitioner deserves to be rejected on the ground of delay and latches because for the first time, he filed petition before the erstwhile Tribunal in the year, 2012, whereas he ought to have approached competent court of law in the year, 2008 on the ground that post has fallen vacant and as such, he be given appointment in terms of 6 communication dated 15.06.2004, whereby he was selected against the post of D.P.E. 7. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused material available on record, this Court finds that vide judgment dated 04.01.2020 passed by this Court in CWPOA No.1269 of 2019, this Court returned categorical finding that selection of the petitioner made in terms of communication dated 15.06.2004 (Annexure P-1) still holds good and as such, there is no reason for the respondents to deny appointment to the petitioner against the post of D.P.E., at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar. Though, aforesaid judgment was laid challenge in LPA, as detailed hereinabove, but same was dismissed vide judgment dated 25.05.2022. After dismissal of aforesaid LPA, respondents themselves gave appointment to the petitioner against the post of D.P.E. at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar vide appointment letter dated 30th August, 2022 (Annexure P-5). Since this Court vide judgment dated 04.01.2020 passed in CWPOA No.1269 of 2019, which has attained finality, had held initial selection of the petitioner made in terms of communication dated 15.06.2004 to be good and pursuant to aforesaid finding given by this Court, 7 respondents gave appointment to the petitioner in the year, 2022, there appears to be merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner should be deemed to have been appointed against the post in question in the year, 2008 itself when such post had become available on account of transfer of one Sh. Jiva Nand. 8. At this juncture, it would be apt to take note of the reply filed by respondents No. 1 to 3 and 5 in CWPOA No.1269 of 2019, as has been recorded in judgment dated 04.01.2020, wherein respondents themselves stated before this Court that though on 15.06.2004, no post of D.P.E. was lying vacant at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar, but such post subsequently fell vacant on transfer of person, namely Sh. Jiva Nand on 15.06.2008. Besides above, petitioner also placed on record information received vide communication dated 13.12.2019 under Right to Information Act suggestive of the fact that post of DPE is lying vacant in Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar w.e.f. 14.06.2019 on account of transfer of Sh. Yashwant Singh, D.P.E. Though, repeatedly, it came to be pleaded before this Court that firstly in the year, 2008 and then in 2019, post of D.P.E at Government Senior 8 Secondary School, Shiva-Badar had fallen vacant, but yet for no cogent and convincing reason, petitioner was not given appointment against the post of D.P.E in the school concerned. 9. Leaving everything aside, once this Court, vide judgment dated 04.01.2020, categorically held that selection of the petitioner made in terms of communication dated 15.06.2004 still holds good and pursuant to afore finding, petitioner herein subsequently came to be given appointment in the year, 2022, prayer made on behalf of the petitioner to grant him notional benefits w.e.f. 15.06.2008 deserves to be considered for the reason that though on afore date, post of D.P.E had become available against which, petitioner could be given appointment pursuant to his selection made vide communication dated 15.06.2004, but for wholly unjustified reason petitioner was not given appointment, rather he was compelled to knock the door of competent court of law time and again. 10. Though, learned Additional Advocate General attempted to argue that petitioner remained silent for long, however having carefully perused the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record, this Court finds that w.e.f. 2008 petitioner had been regularly writing to the department to 9 consider his request for appointment against the post in question, but once such prayer was not considered, he approached this Court by way of CWP No. 2351 of 2012, but before the same could be decided, H.P. State Administrative Tribunal came into existence, as a result thereof, afore petition was transferred to erstwhile Tribunal being service matter. 11. To the disadvantage of the petitioner, erstwhile Tribunal once again came to be abolished in the year, 2019 and thereafter, matter was again transferred to this Court and was re- registered as CWPOA No.1269 of 2019. If it is so, by no stretch of imagination, petitioner can be said to be at fault, rather petition having been filed by him in the year, 2012 remained pending adjudication till passing of judgment dated 04.01.2020, wherein this Court held appointment of the petitioner vide communication dated 15.06.2004 to be valid for all intents and purposes. Since it is admitted fact that post of D.P.E at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva Badar had fallen vacant on 15.06.2008 on account of transfer of regular hand Sh. Jiva Nand, coupled with the fact that petitioner pursuant to his selection made in terms of communication dated 15.06.2004 was eligible to be appointed against the post in question, this Court is of the view 10 that petitioner is required to be considered/ appointed against the post in question w.e.f. 16.06.2008 instead of 30th August, 2022. 12. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly, same is allowed and respondents are directed to treat the date of appointment of the petitioner against the post of D.P.E at Government Senior Secondary School, Shiva-Badar as 16.06.2008 instead of 30th August, 2022, but since petitioner never worked against the post in question w.e.f. 15.06.2008 till his appointment on 30th August, 2022, he shall not be entitled to any monetary benefits qua aforesaid period, but aforesaid period shall be counted towards his service as well as regularization. Since petitioner has been fighting for his rightful claim for more than one decade, this Court hopes and trusts that needful in terms of direction contained in the instant judgment shall be done expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 22, 2025 (shankar)