Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 5]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Shanti Devi vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 5 November, 2018

Bench: Surya Kant, Ajay Mohan Goel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA       CWP No.     180 of 2018 .


                                                        Decided on: 05.11.2018


    Shanti Devi                                                          ...Petitioner





                                             Versus

    State of Himachal Pradesh and others                                 ...Respondents





    Coram

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

Whether approved for reporting?1  For the petitioner:      Ms.   Jyotsna   Rewal   Dua,   Senior Advocate,   with   Mr.   Surender   Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr.   Ashok   Sharma,   Advocate   General, with   Mr.   J.K.   Verma,   Mr.   Adarsh Sharma   and   Mr.   Ashwani   K.   Sharma, Additional   Advocate   Generals,   for respondents No. 1 to 3.

Mr.   Praveen   Chandel,   Advocate,   for respondents No. 4 and 5.

Surya Kant, Chief Justice. (Oral) The   question   of   termination   of   services   of   the petitioner from the post of Drawing  Teacher  is still pending 1  Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 12/11/2018 22:56:47 :::HCHP 2

before the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA No.   6159   of   2017.     Learned   Tribunal   having   declined   ad .

interim stay against termination, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition.  

2. One   of   the   ground   taken   by   the   respondents   to oppose the prayer is that there are a few candidates higher in merit than the petitioner who are still waiting appointment.

3. We are not sure as to how many actual vacancies are there and how many candidates higher in merit are willing for appointment.   We thus deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a request to the learned Tribunal to call for   the   records   with   reference   to   these   two   aspects   of   the matter and decide the petitioner's claim on merits as early as possible and preferably within four weeks.

4. Pending   miscellaneous   applications,   if   any,   also stand disposed of.

                   (Surya Kant)          Chief Justice                       (Ajay Mohan Goel)                Judge ::: Downloaded on - 12/11/2018 22:56:47 :::HCHP 3 November 05, 2018                  ( rajni )   .

r to ::: Downloaded on - 12/11/2018 22:56:47 :::HCHP