Himachal Pradesh High Court
Bishamber Dutt Bhardwaj vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Another on 4 December, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
AT SHIMLA
CWP No.9711 of 2023
Decided on: 4th December, 2023
__________________________________________________________
.
Bishamber Dutt Bhardwaj
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and another
......Respondents
Coram
of
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge
1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes
For the petitioner:
rt Mr. Daleep Singh Kaith, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate
General.
Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)
Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional
Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on
behalf of respondents.
2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ
petition is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the
orders intended to be passed herein.
3. The petitioner, who was appointed as Lecturer
(Commerce) (School Cadre) initially through Parents Teachers
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Association (PTA), under the H.P. Grant-in-Aid to PTA Rules,
2006, and as per the Government Policy was later brought on
Government Contract; and was regularized on same post
.
belatedly, has come up before this Court, seeking the
following relief:-
"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus for directing the
respondents to strictly implement policy
decision dated 11.05.2018 and judgment dated
of
31.08.2022 passed in CWP No.342/2021 to
regularize the services of the petitioner from
rt due date or w.e.f. the date of their juniors/
contract teachers have been regularized i.e.
01.04.2018 alongwith all the consequential
benefits for all intent and purposes.
(ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to
the Respondents to fix the pay of the Petitioner
accordingly and to calculate & pay arrears of
salary consequent upon regularization of
service from due date alongwith seniority etc.
in service."
4. Case of the petitioner as submitted by Mr. Daleep
Singh Kaith, learned counsel is, that being eligible, the
petitioner was initially appointed and joined as Lecturer
(Commerce) (School Cadre) on 24.09.2007 against sanctioned
post under respondent No.2-Director, Elementary Education,
Himachal Pradesh, in accordance with his eligibility under
the Parents Teacher Association (Grant-in-Aid) Rules,2006.
Learned counsel further submits that as per the Government
.
decision dated 16.08.2013, the teachers including the
petitioner, who was appointed through PTA and had
completed seven years of such services were brought on
government contract, in the month of January, 2015.
of
5. He also submits that while working as Teachers,
on contract basis, the State Government further took a
rt
decision on 11.05.2018, for regularizing the services of PTA
contractual teachers on completion of three years of
contractual service w.e.f. 01.04.2018 and though the
respondents have granted the regularization to many other
similarly placed and even junior incumbents from due date
i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.2018, but the respondents were granted the
benefit of regularization to the petitioner on 25.08.2020
belatedly has resulting in treating the equals as unequal
which is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
India.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner states
that the matter in issue, as to whether the contractual
PTA-incumbents were to be granted regularization on
completion of three years of contractual service, in terms of
the Government decision dated 11.05.2018 w.e.f. 01.04.2018,
.
the date on completion of three years of contractual service as
PTA, stands adjudicated by the Division Bench of this Court
in CWP No.342 of 2021, titled as Yashwant Singh and
others Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and another
of
alongwith connected matters, decided on 31.08.2022.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further
rt
submits that the SLP i.e. Special Leave to Appeal (C)
No.6966 of 2023, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh
Versus Yashwant Singh & Ors., filed by State Authorities
stands dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 24.04.2023;
and the judgment in the case of Yashwant Singh
(supra), also stands implemented by the respondents.
8. In the backdrop of the facts mentioned in
Paras-1 to 6 above, the learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that once the respondents have granted the
regularization to the teachers from the date of completion of
three years of contractual service w.e.f 01.04.2018 to many
similarly placed incumbents, including juniors then, the
denial of similar benefit of regularization from the date of
completion of three years of contractual service to the
petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2018 [instead of granting him
.
regularization w.e.f. 25.08.2020], is illegal, arbitrary,
discriminatory and also violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution of India.
9. The denial of regularization to the petitioner
of
w.e.f. 25.08.2020 has resulted in depriving the petitioner
of the benefits of higher pay and higher fixation w.e.f.
rt
01.04.2018 in the unrevised scale and now in the revised
scale after issuance of the HPCS (Revised Pay) Rules on
03.01.2023 and this has also resulted in denying the benefit
of eligibility and grant of ACP on completion of four years of
service from an earlier date i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.2022 and denial
thereof is a recurring loss, every month, till day.
10. Per contra, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional
Advocate General, at this stage, submits that the delay in
granting regularization to the petitioner from due date was
in view of the pendency of litigation in CWP No.6916 of
2011, titled as Pankaj Kumar Versus State of Himachal
Pradesh & others, before the Hon'ble Apex Court, which was
decided on 17.04.2020.
11. Be that as it may, in the peculiar facts and
circumstances and the request, so made by the learned
.
counsel, on instructions, prays for permission to make
a representation to respondent No.2-Director, Elementary
Education, Himachal Pradesh. The prayer being innocuous, is
not opposed by the State Counsel also and needs to be
of
granted.
12. Accordingly, this Court permits the petitioner to
make a
rt
representation to respondent No.2-Director,
Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, within three weeks
from today; with further directions to the aforesaid
respondent to consider/examine the case of the petitioner in
light of the judgment, passed by this Court in the case of
Yashwant Singh (supra); against which the SLP filed by State
Authorities-Respondents stands dismissed and the judgment
has been implemented in case of many others and even
juniors, and then to pass appropriate orders without
discriminating the petitioner, in accordance with law, within
six weeks thereafter and not later than 31.01.2024.
13. Needless to say that, this Court has not adverted
to the rival contentions and merits of the matter and all
Questions of facts and law are left open.
In aforesaid terms, the writ petition as well as the
.
pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of, accordingly.
(Ranjan Sharma)
Judge
December 04, 2023
of
(Bhardwaj)
rt
