Bineet @ Bineet Thakur vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                   CWP No. 7404 of 2023




                                                                       .
                                                   Decided on : 30.10.2023





      Bineet @ Bineet Thakur                                       ....Petitioner.

                   Versus





      State of Himachal Pradesh and others                         ...Respondents.
      Coram
      The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.





      Whether approved for reporting?1
      For the petitioner          :       Ms. Jai Prabha, Advocate vice Mr.
                      r                   Manohar Lal Sharma, Advocate.

      For the respondents         :       Mr. Rupinder Singh, Additional

                                          Advocate General with Mr.
                                          Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate
                                          General and Mr. Rajat Chauhan,
                                          Law Officer.



      Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge              (Oral)

Parties are ad-idem that issue raised in the instant petition stands already adjudicated by this Court vide judgment dated 05.09.2023 passed in CWP No.1802 of 2023, titled Gian Chand vs. State of H.P. and others alongwith connected matters, wherein this Court having taken note of the fact that petitioners in the aforesaid cases stood offered appointment against the post in question prior to issuance of communication dated 12.12.2022, whereby direction came to be issued to all the Departments of the Government of Himachal Pradesh, to keep the undergoing recruitment 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

processes in abeyance till further orders and further ordered that directions/instructions contained in communication .

dated 12.12.2022 shall apply only to those cases where recruitment process is/was underway. Since it is not in dispute that in case at hand, the petitioner herein had participated in the selection process initiated before issuance of aforesaid communication dated 12.12.2022 and after declaration of result, he also stood offered appointment before issuance of aforesaid communication, prayer made in the instant petition deserves to be allowed in terms of the mandate given by this Court in the aforesaid judgment.

2. Having carefully perused the aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court in Gian Chand's case (supra), learned Additional Advocate General fairly acknowledges the factum with regard to application of the same in the case of the petitioner.

3. Consequently, in view of the above, the directions contained in the aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court in Gian Chand's case (supra) are ordered to be made mutatis mutandis applicable in the present case for all intents and purposes. The respondents are directed to accept the joining of the petitioner against the post in issue forthwith and not later than 15th of November, 2023.

4. The petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

.

                                            (Ajay Mohan Goel)
    October 30, 2023                                 Judge
         (narender)





                         r         to









                                              ::: Downloaded on - 30/10/2023 20:34:03 :::CIS