2026:HHC:39042 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13482 of 2024 Decided on: 11.09.2026 Gourav Gorla … Petitioner Versus High Court of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Yogesh Jaswal, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioners: Mr. Deepak Kaushal, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Shalini Thakur, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “That act of the respondent in not counting the services rendered by the petitioner on contract basis as clerk (Nazir) for the purpose of seniority along with all consequential benefits may kindly be held unconstitutional, discriminatory, arbitrary, unreasonable, unjustified, unwarranted, invalid, violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court vide judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court on dated 3-8-2023 (Annexure-P-3) in CW.P. No. 2004/2017 a/w C.W.P. No. 629/2018 upholding the judgment dated 25-5-2017 passed by the erstwhile Ld. H.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 3337/2016. ii. That the respondents may kindly be directed to count the entire service of the petitioner, including initial service on contract basis, followed by regularization towards seniority along with all consequential benefits being a 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:39042 covered matter by the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court vide 3-8-2023 (Annexure-P-3) in CW.P. No. 2004/2017 a/w C.W.P. No. 629/2018 upholding the judgment dated 25-5-2017 passed by the erstwhile Ld. H.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 3337/2016 whereby the service rendered by the employees concerned on contract basis has been ordered to be counted for the purpose of seniority along with consequential benefits and the respondent department is under legal duty to count the Contract services of the petitioner for the purpose of annual increments.” 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed against the post of Clerk on contract basis by following the due process of recruitment in which he participated along with others, vide Annexure P-1 dated 10.04.2014. Thereafter, his services were regularised in terms of Annexure P-2 dated 30.10.2017 and according to the petitioner, as his initial appointment was by following the due process of recruitment, though on contract basis, which culminated into his regularisation, he is entitled for the contract service to be construed as regular service for all intents and purposes. 3. A perusal of the reply filed by the respondents, demonstrates that the stand taken in the said reply is that on account of the Himachal Pradesh Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Regular Employees Act, 2024 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the 2024 Act’), the petitioner was not entitled to the reliefs prayed for. 3 2026:HHC:39042 4. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, and in light of the fact that the Act being relied upon by the respondents, i.e. the 2024 Act, has been declared ultra vires by this Court, which decision of this Court has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, we are of the considered view that the respondents should take a fresh look into the issue being raised by the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the respondents shall take a fresh call on the prayer of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from today and this aspect shall be taken into consideration by the respondents that the 2024 Act is now no more in existence. It goes without saying that in the course of deciding the representation of the petitioner, the date of his initial appointment, the date of regularisation and the date when the petitioner has approached the Authority for the claim made in this writ petition be also taken into consideration by the Authority as prayed for by learned Counsel for the respondents. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge (Yogesh Jaswal) Judge September 11, 2026 (Rishi)