Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/5424/2024 on 5 November 2026
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
CWP No.5424 of 2024.
Decided on : 5
th November,
Shivani Rana ...Petitioner.
Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents.
Coram:
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Yogita Dutta, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. CMP No. 29271 of 2026. Allowed and disposed of. CWP No. 5424 of 2024.
2. Even though reply has not been but with the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal at this stage.
3. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “A. That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the petitioner as deemed regular employee from the date of her initial appointment on contract basis i.e. on 27.08.2009 with all consequential benefits along with interest @9% per annum in terms of judgment passed in CWPOA No.1453 of 2020. B. That the respondents may kindly be directed to treat the petitioner as a regular PGT from the date of her initial 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
appointment for the purposes of seniority and pensionary benefits.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case of the petitioner, the issue raised by her and the reliefs claimed herein stand adjudicated in Ajay Kumar Thakur & Ors. vs. State of H.P.2. It is, however, seen from the record that the petitioner has not preferred any representation for the redressal of his grievance raised in the writ petition.
5. Confronted with this, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring representation within two weeks from today and he would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
6. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority that in case the petitioner submit representation within two weeks from today, the same be considered and decided in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment within a period of six weeks thereafter. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2CWPOA No. 1695 of 2019, decided on 04.10.2024.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 5th November, 2026.
(jai)