2026:HHC:12211 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWPOA No.5947 of 2019 Decided on :17.04.2026 Om Prakash ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others ...Respondents Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Ankit Dhiman, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Hemant Kumar Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents-State. Ms. Kiran Kanwar, Advocate, for respondent No.5. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) The petitioner by way of present petition has prayed for the following substantive relief:- “(A) That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the annexure A-1 dated 18- 11-2015 and direction be issued to the respondent department to allow the applicant to serve as contract teacher as per appointment dated 3rd January 2015.” 2. The facts which emerge from the pleadings are that appointment of the petitioner who was initially 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:12211 appointed as Physical Education Teacher (for short ‘PET’) in Government Middle School, Himgiri Kothi (for short ‘GMS Himgiri Kothi, U/C Government Senior Secondary School, Lahra (for short ‘GSSS Lahra’), District Chamba, H.P., on Parent Teacher Association (for short ‘PTA’) basis was challenged by respondent No.5, before the Sub Divisional Magistrate Churah (for short ‘SDM Churah’), District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, who vide order dated 15.09.2008, had cancelled his appointment and passed an order not to accept his appointment. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the said order passed by the SDM Churah, had preferred the appeal before the Deputy Commissioner Chamba (for short ‘DC Chamba’), District Chamba, H.P., on 27.09.2008 and DC Chamba had stayed the order issued by SDM Churah and case file was kept in abeyance. Later on as per order dated 03.01.2015, passed by the Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Chamba, H.P., services of the petitioner were brought on contract basis. However, vide order dated 18.11.2015 (Annexure A-1), the said orders were withdrawn, and against the said order, the petitioner had filed the Original Application before the Erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, and vide order 3 2026:HHC:12211 dated 21.11.2015, the order dated 18.11.2015 passed by respondent No.4, i.e. Principal GSSS Lahra, District Chamba, H.P. was stayed. After the abolition of the Tribunal, the said Original Application has been registered as present petition. After grant of the stay by the Tribunal, the petitioner filed an application before the DC Chamba, for hearing of the case and the appeal preferred by him was though dismissed on 25.04.2017, but directions were issued to the Deputy Director Elementary Education Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., to examine the case with Director Elementary Education, H.P., and take decision on eligibility criteria of PTA teacher and necessary action be taken accordingly. 3. A perusal of the order passed by DC Chamba reveals that though the petitioner was appointed against the post of PET at GMS Himgiri Kothi, District Chamba (HP) on 22.04.2006, however, he was not having the requisite educational qualification certificate/degree, which he obtained only on 26.07.2006. On that basis, DC Chamba had come to the conclusion that the petitioner was not eligible for the post, at the time of his appointment on 22.04.2006 and thus, he remanded the matter, though observed in the order that the appeal is dismissed with a 4 2026:HHC:12211 direction to the Deputy Director Elementary Education, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., to examine the case and take decision thereupon. 4. In the present proceedings, the petitioner was aggrieved only against the order dated 18.11.2015, whereby, his services taken on contract basis were withdrawn on the grounds that he was not provided reasonable time and has not been heard before passing the impugned order. No show cause notice was given to him, which is clear violation of natural justice and equity. However, subsequently without the direction of any authority, the State Government had issued an office order on 18.06.2024 (page 64), whereby the services of the petitioner along with other persons who were working on PTA basis were regularized with immediate effect. While regularizing the services of the petitioner, there is neither mention about the petition preferred by the petitioner before this Court nor his services were regularized in sequel to directions issued by this Court. 5. Respondents No.1 to 3 filed reply to the petition and averred that the petitioner was engaged as PET in GMS Himgiri Kothi u/c Govt. Sr. Sec. School Lahra as per 5 2026:HHC:12211 resolution passed by the PTA Committee of concerned school on 24.04.2006, without any remuneration and he joined his duties as such on 02.05.2006. However, the permission was granted by respondent No.3 to fill up the vacant post of PET in the aforesaid school on 01.05.2006. However, later on, one Sh. Kewal Krishan, who has been subsequently arrayed as respondent No.5 in the petition lodged a complaint regarding engagement of the petitioner before the SDM Churah, District Chamba, H.P., who inquired into the matter and submitted his Enquiry Report, wherein it was concluded that neither wide publicity was made nor interview was conducted for filling up the post in question. The record of the school revealed that the petitioner was appointed by the PTA Committee on the basis of resolution for which permission was accorded by the Deputy Director Education Chamba, much later than his engagement by the PTA Committee i.e. on 01.05.2006. The petitioner has not impleaded the SDM Churah as well as DC Chamba as necessary parties in the petition. The petitioner was continuously working on account of the stay granted by the DC Chamba and his services were recommended by respondent No.4 for conversion on PTA basis to contract 6 2026:HHC:12211 basis by concealing the material facts and he is still continuing on the basis of the stay granted by DC Chamba. 6. Respondent No.5 filed separate reply to the petition and averred that appointment of the petitioner was found wrong as per the Enquiry Report submitted by the SDM Churah, and at the time of appointment of petitioner on 22.04.2006, he was not possessing the educational qualification/degree which was issued in his favour on 26.07.2006, after his appointment. The petitioner is still continuing, though his appointment has been cancelled by the SDM Churah, District Chamba, H.P. Respondent No.5 was fully eligible for the post of PET and also got permission from DC Chamba on 12.04.2006, but no appointment was given to him by the PTA Committee. Respondent No.5 has also placed on record copy of order dated 25.04.2017 passed by DC Chamba, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed. Respondent No.2 has not taken any steps, despite the fact that respondent No.3 as per communication dated 28.07.2017 had clearly mentioned that the petitioner is not eligible to be appointed and to continue as PET in view of the order passed by the DC Chamba. 7 2026:HHC:12211 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record carefully. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner on the date of his appointment was not possessing the educational qualification to hold the post of PET on PTA basis, but it is a fact that there is no direction issued by this Court to regularize his services. Respondent No.3 vide office order dated 18.06.2024, had regularized the services of the petitioner along with other employees as per the instructions issued by respondent No.1. The relevant office order dated 18.06.2024, is reproduced herein under:- “No. EDN-CHM-ELE.(E-III)B(6) 10/2020 (Reg. PTA-GIA)----- 885-93 Office of the Dy. Director of Elementary Education, Chamba, Distt. Chamba Dated-Chamba-the 18 June 2024 OFFICE ORDER In pursuance to the instructions conveyed vide letter No. EDU-A-Chha(4)5/2022 dated 16.03.2024 from the office of the Secretary (Hr. Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh further conveyed by the Director of Elementary Education H.P. vide Endst. No. EDN-H(Ele)(III) B(6)1-PTA/2023 dated 16.03.2024, the information as provided by the Principals/Headmasters of concerned schools after screening of these documents and on the basis of recommendation of the screening committee constituted in this office, the following PTA's provided teachers working under GIA to PTA's Rule, 2006 engaged/re-engaged after closing of PTA GIA Rules, 2006 in ro C& category against sanctioned posts in the schools where presently working are hereby regularized with immediate effect, strictly in accordance with the R&P 8 2026:HHC:12211 Rules for the post & RTE Act. in the minimum of the time scale of the post in Cell 1 of Level 9 (i.e. Rs. 35600/-) of pay matrix of HP Civil Service (Revised) Rules, 2022 + other allowances as admissible from time to time with the terms and conditions mention below:- S.N. Name of Teacher (Sh. Smt.) Name of School Desg. D.O.B. Date of engageme nt/re- engageme nt Categor y 1 Nazia Khan GMS Kasakra u/c GHS Puccatala DM 28.10.80 07.10.07 31.03.09 Gen 2 Sanjeev Kumar GMS Gajnuien u/c GSSS Kaded DM 16.07.88 19.09.07 22.08.09 SC 3 Virender Singh GMS Jangla u/c GSSS Parchhore PET 03.10.79 02.11.06 09.09.20 Gen 4 Om Prakash GSSS Singadhar PET 14.04.77 02.05.06 Gen 5 Ramesh Kumar GSSS Sandhi PET 27.05.75 06.06.09 30.06.11 Gen 1. The services of the PTA provided teachers will be considered for regularization with immediate effect provided that they fulfill the qualification and eligibility criteria as per R&P Rules and Right to Education Act. 2. The controlling officers concerned are directed to verify all the certificates produced by the candidate concerned from the respective Universities on priority basis and necessary entries to this effect be recorded in the service book of the concerned. Any lapse in this regard shall be viewed seriously and would be the personal responsibility of the controlling officer(s). 3. They shall give an undertaking to withdraw the court cases, if any filled by him /her in any court. 4.The financial benefits will be payable from the prospective date i.e. the date of acceptance of the letter of appointment/regularization to he issued by concerned Competent Authority ( an undertaking in this regard may be taken from these eligible PTA Teachers. 5. If at any point of time, it is so decided or intended by the Govt. to ensure that the candidate thus regularized would have to improve qualification or undergo any training or exam under RTE Act or otherwise. The same would be required to be accomplished by the above 9 2026:HHC:12211 teacher within the prescribed time else the regularization would automatically stand cancelled without giving any notice. An undertaking to this effect may be obtained from the teacher concerned before accepting his/her joining. The benefits of regularization will be subject to the following terms and conditions: I. The post is temporary but likely to be continued and teacher concerned will be on probation for two years which can be extended for another one year if he/she does not satisfactorily completes the probation period keeping in view the work and conduct of the official. II. Prior to granting benefits of regularization every teacher have to submit the following documents/undertaking to their controlling officer. (i) That the PTA's provided teacher so regularized should be medically fit for the post being considered for regularization. The incumbent will have to submit the medical fitness certificate from the CMO/Block Medical Officer of the Illaqua/area concerned at the time of his her joining. (ii) The regularization shall be subject to verification of latest character certificate issued by the competent authority and antecedents of the candidate by the Head of the Institution. (iii) The regularized teacher shall liable to be posted anywhere in the District. (iv) The regularized teacher shall have to submit a declaration to the effect that if married. he/she has only one spouse living. The women teacher will declare that she has not married to a person having another living wife. (v) The regularized teacher will have to make an oath of allegiance faithfulness to the Constitution of India. (vi) The regularized teacher belonging to SC/ST/OBC category etc. will furnish the parental certificate on the prescribed format issued by the competent authority. (vii) In case, the credential of the candidate and any of the certificate/document produced by him/her are found false wrong at any stage, his/her services are liable to be terminated. (viii) The teacher so regularized shall have to serve in difficult area/sub-cadre area for a minimum period of three years. (ix) That candidate who is being regularized will have to 10 2026:HHC:12211 ensure that he/she has acquired complete knowledge of the latest CCS/conduct rules within a fortnight and submit an undertaking to this effect in writing to his/her Head of office/school. (x) The concerned candidate shall have to produced attested copies of his/her academic/professional qualification/domicile/date of birth certificate etc. (xi) The concerned candidate shall furnish a declaration to the effect that he/she is not dismissed employee of any Govt./Semi govt. Department/Organization. He/she will have to give in writing whether he/she was ever convicted by the competent court of law and if so, the particulars of the offence and punishment be stated. Failing to disclose the facts, he/she will render himself/herself liable to be removed from service without any notice as and When the factual facts come to light. The candidate concerned shall have to produce the certificate of his/her being a citizen of India. (xii) The candidate shall have to produce the bonafide Himachali certificate issued by the competent authority. Dy. Director Elem Education, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P.” 9. It is also not in dispute that respondent No.5 has not laid challenge to the office order dated 18.06.2024, whereby the services of the petitioner have been regularized. Once the respondent-State has regularized the services of the petitioner at its own, even if the petitioner withdraws his petition, the said order cannot be cancelled by the respondent-State. Respondent No.5, if at all was aggrieved by the order of regularizing the services of the petitioner, he could have laid challenge to the said order. Not only this, respondent No.5 had not taken any steps after 11 2026:HHC:12211 the order passed by the DC Chamba, whereby it had dismissed the petition, but with a direction to the Deputy Director Elementary Education to examine the matter with Director Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh and take decision on eligibility criteria of PTA teacher and necessary action be taken accordingly. 10. No doubt, respondent No.5 had made a representation on 17.05.2017, before respondent No.2 to take into consideration order dated 25.04.2017 passed by the DC Chamba, but thereafter no action has been taken by him. If a competent authority was not taking any action, respondent No.5 could have approached either before this Court or by resorting to the appropriate remedy, which he has not done and thus at this stage, no benefit can be drawn by respondent No.5 out of order passed by DC Chamba. 11. This Court also cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner had filed the present petition against the withdrawal of taking his services on contract without issuing him show cause notice and he was not granted any opportunity to defend him. It is settled law that any order which has civil/evil consequences, the least which is 12 2026:HHC:12211 expected of the Authority is to hear the affected party. Since the petitioner was not heard before passing the impugned order whereby the order of bringing him on contract was withdrawn, the same is not sustainable in law. 12. Furthermore, after grant of the stay by the Tribunal, services of the petitioner have been regularized by the respondent-State at their own. When the services of the petitioners were regularized, he was possessing the requisite qualification to hold the post. This Court in similar circumstances as exists in the case at hand, had the occasion to consider the issue in CWP Nos. 2259 & 2316 of 2017, titled, Rajeshwari Devi vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others a/w connected matter, noticing that the law on the point is no more res-integra as a Single Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2719 of 2025, titled, Surjit Singh vs. State of H.P. & Others, while deciding the similar issue and taking into consideration the decision of Government taken subsequently, whereby the PTA teachers were even granted the time to acquire the requisite qualification, as in-service candidates and release of Grant- in-Aid in their favour, permitted such persons to continue as PTA teachers, had directed the respondents to re-engage 13 2026:HHC:12211 them forthwith. Since in the present case, after the order passed by the DC Chamba, no effective steps were taken by respondent No.5, as well as by the respondent-State, rather respondent-State passed the office order to regularize the services of the petitioner after considering his qualification on the date of passing the order, the order of withdrawal of his services brought on contract basis is unsustainable, more particularly, when no show cause notice was issued to him and as such, the same is quashed and set aside. 13. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid observations, the present petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.11.2015, passed by respondent No.4 is quashed and set aside. However, there shall be no orders as to cost. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 17 th April , 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (Anurag) Judge