IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8145 of 2023 Date of Decision: 08.12.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Dilam Singh …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rahul Singh Jagota, Advocate, vice Mr. Parkash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs: “(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to release Grant-in-Aid in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. 20.9.2014 in furtherance to the policy to engage the teachers on SMC basis; (ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to extend the benefit of judgement dated 7.4.2016 passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 2467/2015 titled as Villam Singh Vs State of HP & others (Annexure P-9), affirmed by this Hon'ble Court in LPA No.53 of 2018 vide judgement dated 26.11.2018 and further upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 19103/2019 vide judgement dated 9.8.2019, and consequently the petitioner may be held entitled to all consequential benefits including seniority and arrears” 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 1631 of 2023, titled as Shri Ravi Sharma Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. decided on 06.03.2023 and his client shall be content and 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 satisfied in case respondents are directed to consider his case in light of Ravi Sharma (supra). 3. This Court has perused the pleadings as well as the judgment being relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Additional Advocate General also could not dispute that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment being relied upon by the petitioner. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in light of the adjudication made in Ravi Sharma (supra) with a direction that the petitioner be released grant-in-aid in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from today. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 08, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)