IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17715 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ Sumit Kapoor …….Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited … Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tarun Barkta, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main relief:- “ That the impugned acts of the respondent which amounts to executive inaction may kindly be quashed and set aside with the direction to regularize the services of the petitioner from his initial date of appointment which is 13.10.2022 with all consequential benefits like pay ,seniority, arrears etc. immediately and forthwith without any further delay, with further direction to pay arrears @ 95 p.a. and to assign the correct place to the petitioner in the seniority list in the interest of law and justice.” 2. Though, pursuant to order dated 14.11.2025, no reply has been filed by the respondent, but learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that issue otherwise sought to be decided in the case at hand already stands adjudicated by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 CWP No. 5077 of 2020, titled Dila Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 16.05.2023. 3. Having carefully perused the averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that issue involved in the case at hand, is that person with disability is required to be given appointment under 3% quota on regular basis. In Dila Ram’s case(supra), Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, having taken note of judgment passed by this Court in Nitin Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and another, CWPOA No.1077 of 2019, decided on 22.08.2022, which is further based upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. National Federation of the Blinds and others, 2013(10) SCC 772, has arrived at a conclusion that purpose of reservation of posts under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities(Equal Opportunities, Protection of Right and Full Participation) Act, 1995 will not be fulfilled by making temporary, ad- hoc or contract appointments, rather such interpretation will make the very purpose of 1995 Act otiose. 4. While placing reliance upon aforesaid judgments passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court has once again decided the issue in CWP No. 7777 of 2025, titled Deepak Gupta vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others and such, sees no impediment in 3 issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgments, as detailed hereinabove. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is allowed and directions contained in the aforesaid judgments (supra) are ordered to be made mutatis mutandis applicable in the present case for all intents and purposes. Needful in terms of instant judgment be done within a period of six weeks. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 18, 2025 (shankar)