Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWPOA/3132/2019 on 29 December 2022
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Civil Writ Petition (Original Application)
No.3132 of 2019
Date of decision : 29th December, 2022
Meena Kumari and another
…… Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others
……Respondents
Coram:
The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shradha Karol and Mr. Vaibhav Chauhan, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Deputy Advocate General.
Sabina, Judge (oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that by way of present petition, petitioners had sought quashing of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules dated 25.2.2011 to the effect whereby the educational qualifications were added for the post of Senior Scale Stenographers vis-à-vis candidates who were to be promoted. However, during pendency of the petition, vide notification dated 26.2.2022, the column of educational qualification vis-à-vis candidates to be promoted to the post of Senior Scale Stenographers, was deleted. Hence, at this stage, it is only petitioners No.1 and 2 who have the grievance to the effect that in case the educational
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? High Court of H.P. 2022:HHC:16499-DB ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2026 04:18:36 :::CIS
qualification has not been prescribed vide rules under challenge, they could have been promoted when their juniors who were having educational qualifications were promoted. Learned counsel has submitted that, at this stage, petitioners No.1 and 2 would make a representation to respondent No.2 for redressal of their grievances and respondent No.2 be directed to dispose of the same within a time bound manner.
2. Accordingly, without adverting to the merits of the case, we dispose of this petition with a direction that in case petitioners No.1 and 2 move a representation before respondent No.2 within two weeks for redressal of their grievances, respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law, preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
( Sabina )
Judge
( Sushil Kukreja)
Judge December 29, 2022 (ks) High Court of H.P. 2022:HHC:16499-DB ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2026 04:18:36 :::CIS