CWP/19677/2026 on 4 November 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 19677/2026

Decided on: 04.11.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Santosh Kumari

…..Petitioner

Versus State of H.P. and Ors.

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioners: Mr. Yogesh K. Chandel, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. The case set up by the petitioner is that she was engaged as a Language Teacher by the Parent Teachers Association (PTA) of erstwhile Government High School, Traimbali on 01.10.2010. The petitioner did not fulfill the minimum eligibility criteria as per the applicable Recruitment and Promotion Rules on the date of her initial engagement as PTA-provided teacher. She was engaged after the closure of the PTA policy on 03.01.2008. Subsequently, petitioner improved her qualifications and now possesses the educational qualifications as per the Recruitment and Promotion Rules of the post. On 16.03.2024, the

1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2026 03:17:19 :::CIS

2 respondent-Education Department had issued instructions for regularization of services of those PTA-provided teachers working under the Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006 who were appointed after the closure of the PTA/GIA Rules, 2006. The office instructions dated 16.03.2024 mention that left-out teachers would be regularized by giving special relaxation to them, as they are not similarly situated to the eligible PTA-regularized teachers. Petitioner's grievance is that in light of the office instructions dated 16.03.2024, respondent No. 3-the concerned Deputy Director had forwarded the case of the petitioner under office letter dated 15.10.2025 (Annexure P-6) for regularization of her services, but no final call has been taken upon the same as yet.

3. Keeping in view the grievance of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2/competent authority to take a final call on the case of regularization of the petitioner, as forwarded by respondent No. 3 to respondent No. 2 on 15.10.2025 (Annexure P-6), in accordance with law and applicable instructions within six weeks. The decision so arrived at shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Judge

4th November, 2026 rohit High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2026 03:17:19 :::CIS