Himachal Pradesh High Court
Anita Sharma Aged 55 Years vs Pradesh And Others on 4 May, 2022
Bench: Sabina, Satyen Vaidya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 4th DAY OF MAY, 2022
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SABINA
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.2684 of 2022
Between:-
1. ANITA SHARMA AGED 55 YEARS
WIFE OF SHRI SUSHIL SHARMA,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
CHOKHLA, P.O. DAMKHARI,
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SOLAN,
H.P., PRESENTLY WORKING AS
LECTURER IN ENGLISH AT
GOVERNMENT MODEL SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL
DHARAMPUR, DISTRICT SOLAN,
H.P.
2. RADHE SHYAM CHAUHAN AGED
53 YEARS SON OF SHRI MAST
RAM CHAUHAN, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE KHANALAG, P.O.
MANJU, TEHSIL ARKI, DISTRICT
SOLAN, H.P., PRESENTLY
WORKING AS LECTURER IN
COMMERCE AT GOVERNMENT
SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL
KANDAGHAT, DISTRICT SOLAN,
H.P.
3. DINESH KUMAR TANGRAIK AGED
48 YEARS SON OF SHRI RATTI
RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
DIYANDLI, P.O. & TEHSIL NERWA,
DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS
LECTURER IN ECONOMICS AT
GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL
::: Downloaded on - 05/05/2022 20:05:07 :::CIS
2
KANDAGHAT, DISTRICT SOLAN,
H.P.
4. DINESH KUMAR SANKHYAN AGED
56 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI
.
JAGDISH RAM SANKHYAN,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MEHRAN,
P.O. HARLOG, TEHSIL
GHUMARWIN, DISTRICT
BILASPUR, H.P., PRESENTLY
WORKING AS LECTURER IN
ENGLISH AT GOVERNMENT
SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL
KOTHI, TEHSIL GHUMARWIN,
DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P.
5. YASH PAUL SINGH AGED 50
YEARS SON OF SHRI SAIN RAM,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
SADHAVIA-JEORI, P.O. ON
LABANA, TEHSIL RAMPUR,
DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS
LECTURER IN ENGLISH AT
GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL KAOBIL
(15/20), TEHSIL RAMPUR,
DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.
6. SHYAM LAL GUPTA AGED 63
YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI ROOP
LAL GUPTA, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE DATTOWAL, P.O. &
TEHSIL NALAGARH, DISTRICT
SOLAN, H.P.
7. PRADEEP KUMAR AGED 49
YEARS SON OF SHRI DHARAM
SINGH THAKUR, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE THACHRU, P.O. PHARAL,
TEHSIL KUMARSAIN, DISTRICT
SHIMLA, H.P., PRESENTLY
WORKING AS DPE GOVERNMENT
SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL
SANDHU, TEHSIL THEOG,
DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.
8. SUSHEEL KUMAR AGED 54
YEARS SON OF SHRI KRISHAN
CHAND CHAUHAN, RESIDENT OF
::: Downloaded on - 05/05/2022 20:05:07 :::CIS
3
VILLAGE HIMTHALA, P.O.
THANEDHAR, SUB-TEHSIL
KOTGARH, DISTRICT SHIMLA,
H.P., PRESENTLY WORKING AS
.
DPE AT GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL BHUTTI,
SUB-TEHSIL KOTGARH, DISTRICT
SHIMLA H.P.
9. RAJENDER SINGH AGED 46
YEARS SON OF SHRI JALAM
SINGH, RESIDENT OF PEZTA
NIWAS NEAR 33 KV SUB STATION
NEAR KATHER, P.O.
CHAMBAGHAT, TEHSIL &
DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS DPE AT
GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL KALHOG,
TEHSIL KANDAGHAT, DISTRICT
SOLAN, H.P.
10. RATTAN CHAND AGED 49 YEARS
SON OF SHRI NIKKA RAM,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KOTHI NO.
2, P.O. SAMANKOTHI, TEHSIL
BARSAR, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR,
H.P., PRESENTLY WORKING AS
LECTURER IN ECONOMICS AT
GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL JAURE
AMB, TEHSIL BARSAR, DISTRICT
HAMIRPUR, H.P.
11. HEM RAJ AGED 56 YEARS SON
OF SHRI RAMJI DASS, RESIDENT
OF VILLAGE & P.O. GHANDALWIN,
TEHSIL GHUMARWIN, DISTRICT
BILASPUR, H.P., PRESENTLY
WORKING AS LECTURER IN
POLITICAL SCIENCE AT
GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL KOT,
TEHSIL GHUMARWIN, DISTRICT
BILASPUR, H.P.
....PETITIONER
(BY MR. SURINDER PRAKASH SHARMA,
ADVOCATE)
::: Downloaded on - 05/05/2022 20:05:07 :::CIS
4
AND
1. STATE OF H.P. THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY (EDUCATION) TO THE
.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH, SHIMLA 171002.
2. DIRECTOR OF HIGHER
EDUCATION, HIMACHAL
PRADESH, LALPANI, SHIMLA-
171003.
....RESPONDENTS
(MR. ASHWANI SHARMA,
ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble
Ms. Justice Sabina, passed the following:
ORDER
Notice. Mr. Ashwani Sharma, learned Additional Advocate
General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the
respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the issue in
question is squarely covered by the judgment rendered in CWP
No.1853 of 2009-D, titled as Arpana Bali vs. The State of Himachal
Pradesh and others, decided on 10th April, 2013 and the said
judgment, in turn, stands implemented by the respondents. This is a
matter, which is required to be considered by the employer.
3. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a
direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the
petitioners in light of the averments made in this petition and, more
particularly, the judgment rendered in Arpana Bali's case, which stands
implemented. Needful be done within four weeks and in case the
petitioners are similarly situated to Arpana Bali's case, then
.
consequential action be taken within two weeks.
(Sabina)
Judge
(Satyen Vaidya)
Judge
May 04, 2022(ps/vh)
