1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 602 of 2026 Decided on: 07.01.2026 Archana …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma and Ms. Shivani, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice confined to respondents No. 1 to 3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage without calling for reply from the respondents keeping in view the grievance raised by the petitioner and order being passed hereinafter. 2. Petitioner is serving as Lecturer (Commerce). Her case is :- i) Respondents circulated date final seniority list of Trained Graduate Teachers (TGT) appointed upto 31.12.2008 on 07.07.2017 (Annexure P-2). Name of the 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 petitioner figured at Sr. No.5265 thereof depicting her seniority number 8061(16). Petitioner’s name figured again in the same list at Sr. No. 5973 with seniority number 8386. ii) Petitioner’s second time placement in the aforesaid seniority list with seniority No.8386 was oversight and therefore, she accordingly, preferred a representation on 15.12.2025 (Annexure P-5) for correcting her seniority number and treating it as 8061(16). According to the petitioner, nothing was done on her representation instead respondents issued office order on 10.12.2025 (Annexure P- 4) promoting TGT’s & promotee lecturers, promoted prior to 26.04.2010 who had opted for promotion to the post of Head Master under the aforesaid order. The petitioner raised grievance against the aforesaid office letter with regard to Sr. No.150 to 185 i.e. those who had been promoted but had seniority numbers 8061(35) and onwards i.e. were her juniors. 3. Petitioner’s grievance is that juniors to her in the seniority list have been promoted whereas she has been ignored for promotion presumably by taking her incorrect seniority placement number into consideration i.e. instead of taking her seniority placement as 8061(16), respondents have considered the petitioner’s seniority placement 3 No.8386. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has repeatedly represented to the respondents for correcting this error in the petitioner’s seniority. Attention in this regard was invited to documents placed on record as Annexure P-5 which include forwarding the complaint of the petitioner in this regard by concerned authorities to Higher Authorities. According to the petitioner, no constructive action has been taken by the respondent on her representation for redressing her grievance. 4. In view of grievances highlighted by the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with directions to respondent No.2 to decide the petitioner’s grievances raised by her in her representation (Annexure P-5) within period of two weeks from today by taking appropriate call in accordance with law. Copy of so passed order/ decision made be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, to also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 07, 2026 Judge yogesh