IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11691 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.12.2025 __________________________________________________________ Mukesh Sharma and Others …….Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, 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, petitioners have prayed for following main reliefs: “i) That the respondent may kindly be directed to initiate the process for filling up the post of Shastri as per the R&P Rules 2012 on batch wise basis. ii) That the respondent may kindly be directed to consider the petitioner for the post of Shastri as per the R&P Rules on batch wise basis of the batch of 2013 to 2015.” 2. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceedings, respondents have filed reply under the signatures and affidavit of Director, School Education, Himachal Pradesh, perusal whereof reveals that Government had accorded the approval to fill up 494 posts on 19.09.2023, out of which 193 posts were required to be filled-up on batch-wise basis and the respondent-department has issued instructions 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 to all the Deputy Directors of Elementary Education vide letter dated 11.10.2023 (Annexure P-7) to start the recruitment process through batch-wise basis for the post of Shastri as per existing R&P Rules read with the NCTE norms and guidelines issued from time to time. 3. Though having carefully perused afore reply filed on behalf of respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner fairly admits factum with regard to initiation of process to fill up 193 posts of Shastri on batch-wise basis, but his precise grouse is that qua afore 193 posts, persons who though were not eligible to be considered in the batch, are being considered on account of improvement of their qualification. 4. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, states that decision to give chance to such of the Shastris who have improved their qualification has been taken pursuant to direction passed by erstwhile Tribunal in OA No.4836 of 2016, titled as Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others, decided on 30.07.2018, wherein direction came to be issued to consider the candidature of the applicant for the post of Shastri on batch-wise basis by reckoning their degrees of Shastri from the year of initial passing out and not from the year of improvement. 5. Having taken note of aforesaid plea raised at the behest of respondents, coupled with the fact that judgment passed in Vinod Kumar Sharma (supra) has attained finality, no illegality otherwise can be said to have been committed by the respondents inasmuch considering the 3 candidature of such of the candidates who have improved their qualification. Since process already stands initiated to fill up 193 posts of Shastri on batch-wise basis, grouse of the petitioner can be said to have been redressed. 6. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of, with the direction to respondents to ensure that process initiated pursuant to approval given by Government of Himachal Pradesh vide communication dated 19.09.2023 is taken to its logical end, if not already taken, expeditiously. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 03, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)