2026:HHC:41485 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA LPA No. 45 of 2025 Decided on: 25.09.2026 ____________________________________________________________ Shakuntla Devi ....Appellant Versus Subhadra Devi & others ...Respondents _____________________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Hakam Bhardwaj, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Sidharth Jalta, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.2 to 5. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) The present Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by respondent No.5/appellant seeking consideration of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.7266 of 2023, titled, Subhadra Devi vs. State of H.P. and others dated 23.08.2024, whereby the writ petition was allowed and directions were given to allow the petitioner-Subhadra Devi to continue as Part Time Multi 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Task Worker at Government Primary School, Gowal Tikkar, Education Block Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P. 2. While issuing notice on 25.08.2025, we had noted the contention and argument raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant, which read as under:- “Arguments raised by the counsel for the appellant is that the writ petition filed by private respondent-Subhadra Devi, was allowed on the ground that the appeal filed by the present appellant, as such, was beyond 15 days of selection/appointment which was of 5th August, 2022 having been filed on 3rd September, 2022. It is submitted that the provision for filing appeal was only incorporated on 25th August, 2022 [Annexure P-4] and, therefore, limitation should have been counted from the said date. In such circumstances, the writ petition is liable to be heard on merit.” 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1/original writ petitioner submits that he is not in a position to controvert the arguments raised, but since the writ petition was not decided on other grounds, as such, he will have no objection if the order dated 23.08.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the matter is heard on merits. He further submits that the matter is pending since considerable time and the writ petitioner had already been protected vide order dated 06.10.2023 in CWP No.7266 of 2023, whereby the order of status quo had been passed. 4. Since the pleadings are already complete on behalf of the 3 respondents, we are of the considered opinion that learned Single Judge would take up the matter expeditiously and decide the issue on merits. 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and order dated 23.08.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge is quashed and set aside. The writ petition is restored to its original number and same be listed on 12.10.2026 as per roster. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice 25th September, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (Anurag) Judge