Himachal Pradesh High Court
Rosy Mathew Daugther Of vs The State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 3 March, 2022
Bench: Sabina, Satyen Vaidya
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 3rd DAY OF MARCH, 2022
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SABINA
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 1137 OF 2022
Between:-
1. ROSY MATHEW DAUGTHER OF
SH. ROBERT MATHEW RESIDENT OF
MOHALA DAROG, CHAMBA TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P. PRESENTLY
WORKING AS LECTURER OF SANSKRIT
AT GOVERNMENT SENIOR SECONDARY
SCHOOL JADERA DISTRICT CHAMBA
H.P. AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.
2. JAGDISH CHAND SON OF SH. AVAL RAM
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PAHANAHI POST
OFFICE SAMRA DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.
PRESENTLY WORKING AS LECTURER OF
ECONOMICS AT GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL LYLH DISTRICT
CHAMBA H.P. AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.
3. SUDHIR KUMAR SON OF SH. PRAKASH
CHAND RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUDHRA
POST OFFICE SUNDLA TEHSIL SALOONI
DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P. PRESENTLY
WORKING AS LECTURER OF POLITICAL
SCIENCE AT GOVERNMENT SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOHAL
DISTRICT CHAMAB, H.P.
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
....PETITIONERS
(BY MR. DEVENDER K. SHARMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
::: Downloaded on - 03/03/2022 20:11:51 :::CIS
2
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION TO THE
GOVT. OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA, H.P.
.
2. DIRECTOR, HIGHER EDUCATION
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH AT SHIMLA, H.P.
..RESPONDENTS
(MR. ASHWANI SHARMA, ADDITIONAL
ADVOCATE GENERAL)
__________________________________________________________________
This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Ms.
Justice Sabina, passed the following:-
ORDER
Notice. Mr. Ashwani Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment rendered in CWP No. 1853 of 2009-D, titled as Arpana Bali vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 10th April, 2013 and the said judgment, in turn, stands implemented by the respondents. This is a matter, which is required to be considered by the employer.
3. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioners in light of the averments made ::: Downloaded on - 03/03/2022 20:11:51 :::CIS 3 in this petition and, more particularly, the judgment rendered in Arpana Bali's case, which stands .
implemented. Needful be done within four weeks and in case the petitioners are similarly situated to Arpana Bali's case, then consequential action be taken within two weeks.
4. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any.
For compliance, to come up on 20.04.2022.
( Sabina )
Judge
March 03, 2022 ( Satyen Vaidya )
(naveen) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 03/03/2022 20:11:51 :::CIS