[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Himachal Pradesh High Court
Nirat Ram & Ors vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors on 20 December, 2025
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.20069 of 2023
Date of Decision: 20.12.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
.
Nirat Ram & Ors.
.........Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.
.......Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
of
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioners: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate with
rt Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate
General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish
Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Notice. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate
General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the
respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the
matter is heard at this stage.
3. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following
substantive reliefs:-
"a. That an appropriate writ, order or directions may kindly be
issued and the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the
services of the petitioner in view of the Judgment passed by this
Hon'ble Court in CWP No.4971/2024 titled as Nitin Thakur & others
versus State of H.P. & others alongwith connected petitions as they
have put in more than required number of years as required under the
regularization policy of the State of H.P.
b. That appropriate writ or directions may very kindly be issued to
.
the respondents by quashing the oral termination/disengagement of
the contractual services of the petitioners w.e.f 31.10.2024 from their
respective posts and condone the break in contractual service of the
petitioners till, their joining back, regularization towards continuing in
service for all intents and purposes and refix the pay of the petitioners
and pay the entire consequential benefits in favour of the petitioners
with in time bound manner alongwith 12% interest.
of
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that issue
raised by the petitioners and reliefs claimed herein have already been
rt
adjudicated by this Court in CWP No.4971 of 2024, titled as Nitin
Thakur Versus State of H.P. and others alongwith connected
matters, decided on 23.09.2025, which was disposed of with following
operative directions:-
"89. Consequently, in view of the detailed discussion made herein
above as well as law taken into consideration, present petitions are
allowed and respondents are directed to regularize the contractual
services of the petitioners on the post they were offered engagement in
the Department of Horticulture after completion of two years contractual
service in terms of regularization policy framed by the Government of
Himachal Pradesh."
5. It has been informed by learned counsel for the parties
that the aforesaid judgment was assailed by the State by way of LPA
No.775 of 2025, titled as State of HP & Ors. vs. Nitin Thakur &
Ors., wherein vide order dated 12.11.2025, the direction of
regularization has been stayed by the Hon'ble Principal Division
Bench, however, with the rider that the State shall not dispense with
the services of the petitioners (therein) and the petitioners shall
.
continue to serve on the same terms and conditions; That since the
writ petitioners have been paid on contractual basis, the State will be
under bounden duty to pay all the said person and utilize their
services; Further, it is open to the State to utilize the services of the
of
writ petitioners/employees in any other similarly situated projects.
Operative part of order dated 12.11.2025 reads as under:-
rt
"9. However, keeping in view the fact that the writ petitioners have
been serving the State since the year 2019, we deem it appropriate that
the State shall not dispense with their services and writ petitioners
shall continue to serve on the same terms and conditions. Needless to
say, that since writ petitioners have been paid on contractual basis, the
State will be under bounden duty to pay all the said persons and
utilize their services. Further, it is open to the State to utilize the
services of the writ petitioners/ employees in any other similarly
situated projects."
6. Learned counsel further submits that petitioners would be
satisfied in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed
to consider the case of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid order
dated 12.11.2025 passed in Nitin Thakur (supra). Learned Additional
Advocate General has no objection to the aforesaid prayer.
7. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without
examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of
with direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and
decide the case of the petitioners in accordance with law as well as
taking into consideration aforesaid order dated 12.11.2025 passed in
.
LPA No.775 of 2025, which shall be subject to the final outcome of the
said appeal, by passing appropriate order within a period of six weeks
from today. Copy of the order so passed, be also communicated to the
petitioner.
of
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so
also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
rt
December 20, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma),
(sunil) Judge
