Nisha Rani vs State Of Hp And Others on 26 June, 2019

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Nisha Rani vs State Of Hp And Others on 26 June, 2019

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                                     CWP No. 8914 of 2012
                                                     Decided on: 26.6.2019




                                                                          .

    Nisha Rani                                                            ....Petitioner.
                      Versus
    State of HP and others                                             ... Respondents.





    ................................................................................................
    Coram

    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.





    Whether approved for reporting?1                No

    For the petitioner.                      : Ms. Anjali Soni Verma, Advocate.

    For respondents                          : Mr. Dinesh Thakur, Additional

                                               Advocate General.

    Ajay Mohan Goel, J (Oral)

By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed communication, Annexure P-4, dated 8.10.2012 vide which the petitioner was informed that as the qualification acquired by her from Sahitya Sammelon Institute was not recognized for the purpose of appointed as a Language Teacher, therefore, Grant-in-Aid could not be allowed in her favour for serving against said post in Government Sr. Secondary School, Deol Tehsil Baijnath District Kangra and an option was given to her that she would continue under the Local PTA on monthly emoluments of `2000/-.

2. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2019 23:59:19 :::HCHP 2

approach the respondent-State, if so advised for fresh consideration of her case for Grant-in-Aid, if permissible in law on the strength of .

subsequent qualification acquired by her from EIILM University Sikkim.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that in case petitioner wants to withdraw the petition and further wants to make representation to the State, then it should not be construed as if the State has given its consent to the said prayer made by the petitioner. The statement of learned Additional Advocate General is taken on record.

Petition is permitted to be withdrawn. It is clarified that in case any representation is filed by the petitioner as has been prayed herein above, then the authorities shall be at liberty to deal with it in accordance with law. It is further clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case and the representation, if any shall be decided by the authorities in terms of the Rules in force, uninfluenced by any observation made in this order. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge 26th June, 2019.

(Guleria) ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2019 23:59:19 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court