Himachal Pradesh High Court

CWP/18461/2026 on 26 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

CWP No. 18461 of 2026.

Decided on : 26

th October, 2026

Kuldeep Singh

...Petitioner.

Versus State of H.P. & Anr.

....Respondents.

Coram:

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Shalini Thakur, Mr. Praveen Chandel and Mr. Sahil Singh Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. L. N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General for respondent No.1. Ms. Neelam Kaplas, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Notice. Mr. L. N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Ms. Neelam Kaplas, learned counsel appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2, respectively.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage.

3. The petitioner is serving as Junior Office Assistant (IT), in respondent No. 2. His representation for considering contractual service for the purpose of promotion was rejected by respondent No.2 on 14.02.2024 (Annexure P-3), primarily for the reason that there was no such 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

provision in the contractual policy of the State Government, as also in the applicable Recruitment and Promotion Rules. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking applicability of Taj Mohammad and others Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others2 for claiming the aforesaid relief. His grievance is that his representation (Annexure P-5) preferred in this regard has not been considered and decided in view of Taj Mohammad2. It is an admitted position that the “Himachal Pradesh Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Government Employees Act, 2024” has been quashed and set aside in Devinder Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr3. It is also a matter of record that State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Vs. Devinder Kumar & Ors.4 instituted by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the aforementioned judgment, has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 29.07.2026. While dismissing the appeal, the Hon’ble Apex Court granted four months’ time to the State Government to do the needful in terms of the judgment.

4. In view of above, the present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner afresh notwithstanding the rejection order dated 14.02.2024 (Annexure P-3) for the grant of relief prayed for by him, in accordance with the time-line 2 CWP No.2004 of 2017 decided alongwith connected matter on 03.08.2023. 3 CWP No. 3361 of 2025 decided alonwith connected matters on 25.04.2026 4 Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 24885/2026 decided on 29.07.2026

indicated by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The petitioner is at liberty to seek appropriate remedy for the redressal of his surviving grievances, if any, at an appropriate stage, in case, necessity so arises, in future. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 26th October, 2026.

(jai)

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead