Himachal Pradesh High Court
_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors on 13 August, 2025
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.7505 of 2021
.
Date of Decision: 13.8.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Ms. Rajni Joshi
.........Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
.......Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner: Mr. C.N. Singh, Dr. Nidhi Singh, Mr.
r Devender Sharma and Mr. Anshul Gandhi,
Advocates.
For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr.
Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional
Advocates General.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
For the reasons stated in the application, same is allowed.
Application stands disposed of accordingly.
2. Petitioner feels aggrieved against disengagement/breaks
as given in her service by the respondents w.e.f 28.02.1997 to
01.01.2004. According to her, the said breaks were in violation of
principle of 'last come first go'. The petitioner also seeks applicability
of judgment dated 1.9.2015 rendered in LPA No. 146 of 2010, titled
as State of H.P. & Ors Vs. Narain Singh (alongwith connected
matters). Petitioner also prays for quashing of order dated 06.08.2021
.
whereby respondents rejected her case as not covered under the
aforesaid decision.
3. Following substantive reliefs have been prayed for by the
petitioner:-
"(i) Issue writ of Certiorari, Mandamus or other appropriate writ
order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit quashing the
order dated 06.08.2021 (Annexure P-16) for all intents and
purposes.
(ii) Issue writ of Certiorari Mandamus or other appropriate writ
order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit declaring the
disengagement/breaks in service of the Petitioner w.e.f.
22.09.1993 to 07.01.2004 as illegal being in violation of the
principle of last come first go for all intents and purposes.
(iii) Accordingly Issue writ of Certiorari, Mandamus or other
appropriate writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems
fit directing the respondent department to treat the break
period w.e.f. 22.06.1993 to 06.01.2004 as continuity in service
for regularization, service benefits etc,for all intents and
purposes with all consequential benefits in terms of the law laid
down by the Hon'ble High Court in CWP (T) No. 5253/2008 title
Narain Singh Vs State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors and affirmed
in LPA no.146 of 2010 (State of H.P. Vs Narain Singh along with
other connected cases).
(iv) Accordingly Issue writ of Certiorari, Mandamus or other
appropriate writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems
fit directing the respondents department to grant benefit of her
contractual services and consequentially regularize the service
of the Petitioner after completion of 8 years of contractual
service( w.e.f. 16.11.2000) in terms of the policy framed by the
department with all consequential benefits by modifying the
order of regularization dated 18.12.2014 for all intents and
purposes."
.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issue
raised in this writ petition has been decided on 5.3.2020 in CWP No.
3151 of 2019 titled as Babita Rani Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh.
The said decision is as under:-
"Even though, the respondents have filed short reply, however, copy of
the same is not on record. Registry is directed to trace and place the
same on record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for grant of the following
reliefs:
r "i) That termination of the petitioner service w.e.f. 12.10.1998 to
29.06.2001 be declared illegal being in violation of the principle
of last come first go. ii) That the respondent department may
kindly be directed to treat the entire period w.e.f. 12.10.1998 to
29.06.2001 as continuity in service for regularization, service
benefits etc., for all intents and purposes with all consequential
benefits in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court
in CWP(T) No. 5253/2008 titled Narain Singh vs. State of
Himachal Pradesh & Ors. and affirmed in LPA No. 146 of 2010
(State of H.P. vs. Narain Singh along with other connected
cases). iii) That accordingly the respondents department may
kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner after
completion of 8 years of contractual service ( w.e.f. 12.06.2006)
in terms of the policy framed by the department with all
consequential benefits."
3. The short reply filed by the respondents, copy whereof made
available to us in the open Court, reveals that the respondents
themselves have undertaken to consider the case of the petitioner in
light of the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP(T) No.5253 of
2008, titled Narain Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others,
which has been affirmed right upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court and
extend the benefits to all retrenched contractual teachers including
non-petitioners, as is evident from para-3 of the short reply which
reads as under:
.
"3. That after dismissal of SLP in Narain Singh's case the entire
matter for further directions regarding implementation of the
judgment passed in Narain Singh's case to all retrenched
contractual teachers including non petitioners in Narain Singh's
Case are being examined at the Govt. level and after decision,
action in the present matter will be taken."
4. Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to
the respondents to implement the judgment passed in Narain Singh's
case (supra) and extend the benefits to all the retrenched contractual
teachers including the petitioner and also the nonpetitioners, if found
to be similarly situated. Needful be done within six weeks from today.
5. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of."
5. The above position has not been disputed by the
respondents. Impugned order is non-speaking and also not in
conformity with above decision. In Babita Rani (supra), respondents
were directed to implement the decision in Narain Singh (supra) qua
all retrenched contractual teachers, if found to be similarly situated.
Impugned order is also at variance with the office order dated
30.06.2021 (Annexure P-13) whereunder services of several retrenched
para-teachers (subsequently re-engaged) were regularized.
6. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is
disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of
the petitioner afresh in light of the judgment passed in Narain Singh
(supra) and extend the benefits to the petitioner, if found to be
similarly situated. Needful be done within six weeks from today.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
.
of.
August 13, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
r to
