IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17185 of 2025 Date of Decision: 5.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Dev Chand ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Suneel Awasthi, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs: “i) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondents No.1 to 3 to release due and admissible Grant-in- Aid to respondent No.4 i.e. School from the time the same is due to petitioner along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amount was due to them till his services are taken over by the State Government. ii) That the respondent State may kindly be directed to take over the services of the petitioner in terms of office order dated 20.07.2011.” 2. Before reply could be received from the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner states that since issue sought to be decided in the instant proceedings, has been adjudicated by Coordinate Benches as well as Division Bench of this Court in CWP - 2 - No. 4196 of 2013, titled as Ms. Sushma Rana and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., decided on 3.6.2015, LPA No. 88 of 2016, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Ms. Sushma Rana and Ors., decided on 22.9.2022 and CWP No. 11260 of 2024, titled as Renuka Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., decided on 24.7.2025 (Annexure P-6, P-7 and P-8), petitioner would be content and satisfied in case, case of the petitioner is considered and decided in terms of afore judgments. 3. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General while putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, states that case of the petitioner shall be decided in accordance with afore judgments in accordance with law. 4. Having carefully perused averments contained in the instant petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith vis-à-vis judgments sought to be relied upon, this Court has no hesitation to conclude that issue otherwise sought to be decided in these proceedings already stands adjudicated in the afore judgments and as such, no prejudice, if any, shall be caused to either of the parties in case prayer made by the petitioner to decide his case in light of aforesaid judgments is accepted. 5. In view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider case of the petitioner in light of afore judgments, expeditiously, preferably, within six weeks. - 3 - Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order. December 5, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge