IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6482 of 2025 Decided on: 23rd May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Suresh Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Harsh Vardhan and Mr. Shubham Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3-State. Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner, aged 71 years, who retired as Superintendent, has instituted this writ petition for the grant of following substantive relief:- “I. That the respondents may be directed to engage again the petitioner in service, the office order dated 10.10.2024 may kindly be quashed and set aside as it totally malafide, arbitrary and unconstitutional.” 2. Office order dated 10.10.2024 (Annexure P-3), impugned in this writ petition, reads as under:- 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 “In reference to the resignation request raised on dated 03/10/2024 by Sh. Suresh Chand, (Retd. Supdt. Grade-II) engaged as Senior Assistant in the O/o CALA- cum-SDM Nagrota Bagwan District Kangra HP with the reason to unable to do the work, his resignation is hereby accepted and Sh. Suresh Chand is hereby relieved from the services as Senior Assistant in the O/o CALA-cum-SDM Nagrota Bagwan on 03/10/2024 A.N. as per his request.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner disputed that the petitioner had ever resigned from service. Accordingly, on 21.05.2025, learned Additional Advocate General was directed to have instructions from respondents No.1 to 3 about the resignation submitted by the petitioner as was referred in the impugned office order dated 10.10.2024. 4. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 23.05.2025 from the Competent Authority, Land Acquisition-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, which state that the petitioner was working in the office of CALA-cum- SDM Nagrota Bagwan as Senior Assistant (retired Superintendent). He tendered his resignation on 03.10.2024 under his own handwriting, citing the reason that he was not able to do work. Copy of the resignation tendered by the petitioner on 03.10.2024 has also been appended alongwith the instructions memo. The instructions memo further states that the petitioner has 3 been relieved, as his resignation was accepted by the competent authority on 10.10.2024. In view of the facts as have come forth, no case for interference with the impugned office order dated 10.10.2024 is made out. The writ petition, therefore, fails and is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 23, 2025 Judge Mukesh