Himachal Pradesh High Court
Decided On: 15.07.2025 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 15 July, 2025
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
2025:HHC:22771
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
.
Exe. Pet. No. 568 of 2024
Decided on: 15.07.2025
Kumari Priyanka and another ... Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others ... Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
___________________________________________________________________
For the petitioner : Mr. S.D. Gill, Advocate.
For the respondents
r : Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Additional
Advocate General for respondent No. 1.
: Mr. Balram Sharma, DSGI through VC.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought execution of
the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 5386 of 2014, titled as
Kumari Priyanka and others vs. State of H.P. and others, decided on
30.04.2019. The main writ petition was disposed of by this Court in the
following terms:-
"4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this
petition is disposed of with the direction that except the post
of Art & Craft Teacher, the petitioners, who are manning
other posts, shall be allowed to continue to serve against the
said posts till the same are filled up by the respondents on
regular basis. It goes without saying that the petitioners shall
also be at liberty to participate in the process of recruitment to
the posts in issue and the respondent may take no
consideration the factum of their experience in the School
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2025:HHC:22771
concerned while filling up the said posts. As far as the post of
.
Art & Craft Teacher which presently is being manned by
petitioner No. 2 is concerned. learned Senior Panel Counsel
for respondents No. 2 and 3 submits that as this post caters
to Vocational Training, the respondents do not intend to fill up
the same on regular basis, however, the post will be
continued till there are students, who opt for the said
vocational course. His statement is taken on record. It is
directed that petitioner No. 2 shall be permitted to continue to
serve against the post of Art & Craft Teacher as long as
students are there opting the said course. This, however, will
not preclude the State from taking any Policy decision, as
prayed for, with regard to the post of Art and Craft Teacher in
future The Court has been informed that petitioner No. 4 has
already left the job. Therefore, the order passed hereinabove
shall only govern the services of petitioners No. 1 to 3.
2. During the pendency of these proceedings, the petitioner has
been re-engaged to impart education in the same subject, though on
outsource basis. Therefore, this execution petition is closed with the
observation that till the eventuality, as is stated in para-4 of the judgment,
does not arise, services of the petitioner shall be allowed to continue, be it
on outsource basis or otherwise.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
July 15, 2025
(narender)
