Himachal Pradesh High Court
Kushma Kumari vs State Of H.P. And Others on 18 May, 2015
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
CWP No. 11654 of 2011.
Date of Decision: 18.5.2015
Kushma Kumari .... Petitioner.
.
Vs.
State of H.P. and others .... Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for Reporting?
For the petitioner: Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Dy. Advocate
General.
Sureshwar Thakur, J.(Oral):
1. The petitioner herein had filed the instant writ petition claiming therein the hereinafter extracted reliefs:
(a) That the impugned action of the respondents is not releasing the grant-in-aid may kindly be quashed and set-aside.
(b) That the writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ of direction may kindly be issued directing the respondents to release the grant-in-aid from the date of her appointment till date @ 9% interest per annum.
(c) That the respondents may be further directed to continue the grant-in-aid in future also.
(d) That the respondents may kindly be further directed with a writ of mandamus to consider the petitioner equivalent to the teachers provided by the PTA who are getting grant-in-aid and not to disturb/dismiss the service of the petitioner.::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:12:19 :::HCHP 2
(e) That the cost of petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
(f) The entire record of the case may kindly be .
summoned from the respondents before this Hon'ble Court."
2. However, para materia to the reliefs claimed in the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner had claimed similar reliefs in Civil Writ Petition No. 5495 of 2013-J which was decided on 24th October, 2013. A perusal of the orders rendered by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition pronounces the factum of the reliefs para materia to the ones claimed by the writ petitioner herein having come to be declined. Consequently, this Court is constrained to render a decision in conflict with and in supersession to the judgement rendered by this Court in CWP No. 5495 of 2013. In sequel, there is no merit in the petition, which stands dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs.
18th May, 2015. (Sureshwar Thakur)
(TM) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:12:19 :::HCHP