Himachal Pradesh High Court
EX.P./1768/2026 of DIMPLE SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS on 7 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Ex. Pet. No.1768 of 2026 Decided on: 7th October, 2026 Dimple Sharma ....Petitioner versus State of H.P. and others. ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
2026:HHC:43840-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Ex. Pet. No.1768 of 2026
Decided on: 7th October, 2026
Dimple Sharma
....Petitioner
versus
State of H.P. and others.
...Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner: Mr. Adarsh Kumar Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Amit Kumar Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General.
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral)
Learned Deputy Advocate General has produced instructions dated 06.10.2026 issued by the Director, Directorate of School Education, Himachal Pradesh and copy of order dated 17.09.2026 passed by the Deputy Director of School Education (Elementary) Shimla District Shimla H.P.- 171004, which are taken on record.
2. A perusal of aforesaid order reveals that the case of the petitioner is not similarly situated to CWP No.342 of 2021, titled, Yashwant Singh and others vs. State of H.P. and others as she did not complete seven years of continuous service by 03.01.2015 and is ineligible for being taken over on contract basis with effect from 01.02.2015 and 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2026:HHC:43840-DB 2
hence her request to regularize her services with effect from 01.04.2018 on the analogy of Yashwant Singh's case is not tenable and, therefore, rejected.
3. This Court while disposing of the writ petition on 05.03.2026 had directed the respondents that in case the representation is preferred by the petitioner, the same shall be decided within a period of four weeks.
4. Since the mandate contained in the judgment dated 05.03.2026 passed in CWP No.1300 of 2026, titled, Dimple Sharma vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others has duly been complied with and the representation filed by the petitioner has been decided, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present execution petition and the same is disposed of as having been fully satisfied. However, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.09.2026 passed by the Deputy Director of School Education (Elementary) Shimla District Shimla H.P., she can avail an appropriate remedy in accordance with law.
5. The execution petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications if any, also stand disposed of.
( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) 7th October, 2026
Judge (naveen)