IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15836 of 2026 Decided on: 14th September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dev Chand Thakur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Suneel Awasthi, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “i. Issue an appropriate writ of Certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.06.2026 (Annexure P-10) passed by the Director of School Education, Himachal Pradesh i.e. respondent no.2. ii. Issue an appropriate writ of Mandamus directing the respondents No.1 to 2 to release 95% Grant-in-Aid to the Petitioner’s school i.e. Respondent No.3 from the date of his appointment as Lecturer History in the school till his absorption in the State Department. iii. Issue an appropriate writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to extend to the petitioner all consequential 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 benefits available under the policy dated 20.07.2011, including release of admissible Grant-in-Aid and consideration for taking over of his services in terms of the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court in Sushma Rana, Renuka Sharma and connected judgments. iv. Declare that the petitioner is entitled to be treated at par with other similarly situated employees of erstwhile 95% aided schools and that denial of such benefit is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.” 2. Petitioner had instituted CWP No.17185 of 2025 seeking the aforementioned reliefs on the basis of Renuka Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 as also Sushma Rana and others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others3. The said writ petition was disposed of on 05.12.2025 with direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of above decisions. Vide order dated 20.06.2026 (Annexure P-10), respondent No.2 rejected the case of the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that though the decision rendered in Sushma Rana3 has been affirmed in LPA No.88 of 2016, decided on 22.09.2022, but LPA No.215 of 2026 preferred by the respondents against Renuka Sharma2 is yet pending 2 CWP No.11260 of 2024, decided on 24.07.2025 3 CWP No.4196 of 2013, decided on 03.07.2015 3 consideration, wherein, vide order dated 11.05.2026, operation of the judgment dated 24.07.2025 has been stayed, as according to the respondents, facts were not similar in both the matters. 4. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law within six weeks after the decision is rendered in LPA No.215 of 2026 and in terms thereof as also in LPA No.88 of 2016. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 14, 2026 Judge Mukesh