Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23874 (HP)

KESHAV RAM v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/16519/2026 · 2026-09-23

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16519 of 2026 Decided on: 23rd September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keshav Ram …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Amir Khan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner seeks direction to the respondents to covert his services from Part-Time Water Carrier to Whole Time Daily Wager on completion of seven years of service as such; regularization on completion of four years of daily wage service as per the applicable policy and to grant him all consequential monetary benefits. Learned counsel for 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already preferred a representation in this regard on 15.09.2025 (Annexure P-5) to the Principal, GSSS Shanghar, Block Sainj, District Kullu, but the aforesaid representation has not been decided till date. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 3. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law and keeping in view the applicable policy, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 23, 2026 Judge Mukesh