IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 15566 of 2026 Decided on : 8 th September , 2026 Sher Singh ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Jagmohan Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner was appointed as Drawing Master on Parent Teacher Association basis in the respondent-Education Department on 16.10.2006. Services of the petitioner were regularized on 17.8.2020. In terms of office order dated 17.01.2024, services of the petitioner were regularized from an interior date, i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.2018. The office order also directed release of consequential benefits including monetary to the petitioner. On 06.03.2024, respondents issued office order withdrawing the benefits conferred upon the petitioner under office order dated 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 17.01.2024, on the ground that office order dated 17.01.2024 was issued on misconception of fact that case of petitioner was similar to that of Yashwant Singh and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another2 and that petitioner's case was not similar to that of Yashwant Singh2 . On this basis, vide office order dated 06.03.2024, the respondents withdrew with immediate effect, the office order dated 17.01.2024 in the case of petitioner. The office order dated 06.03.2024 also directed the concerned Principal/Headmaster to effect recovery from the petitioner in lumpsum. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the aforesaid office order was never served upon the petitioner and that he became aware of the order dated 06.03.2024 only when the respondents renewed their directions for effecting recovery from the petitioner of the monetary benefits allegedly paid in excess to him vide office letter dated 04.06.2026 (Annexure P-7), which was brought to the notice of petitioner by the concerned Principal/Headmaster. It is also the case of the petitioner that no notice whatsoever had been issued to the petitioner before withdrawing office order dated 17.01.2024. 4. From the perusal of office order dated 06.03.2024, it becomes quite evident that no notice whatsoever had been issued to the petitioner 2 CWP No.343 of 2021, decided along with connected matters on 31.08.2022. 3 before ordering recovery from him or before holding that case of the petitioner was not at par with that of Yashwant Singh2 and others. On that ground alone, office order dated 06.03.2024 is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner. Respondents shall be at liberty to issue notice to the petitioner in accordance with law and then proceed further in the matter. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 8th September, 2026. (jai)