Equal treatment in employment is required under Articles 14 and 16, necessitating fair regularization processes for all similarly situated individuals.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

The petitioners, who were appointed as teachers, initially through Parents Teachers Association (PTA) under the H.P. Grant-in-Aid to PTA Rules, 2006 and as per the Government Policy were later brought on Government Contract; and were regularized on same posts belatedly, have come up before this Court, seeking the following reliefs:-

i) Issue a writ of mandamus for directing the respondents to strictly implement policy decision dated 11.05.2018 and judgment dated 31.08.2022 passed in CWP No. 342/2021 (Annexure P-1) to regularize the services of the petitioners from due date or w.e.f. the date their juniors/contract teachers have been regularized i.e. 01.04.2018 alongwith all the consequential benefits for all intent and purposes.

ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent to fix the pay of the petitioners accordingly and to calculate and pay arrears of salary consequent upon regularization of service from due date alongwith seniority etc, in service.

2. Case of the petitioners as submitted by the learned counsel is, that being eligible, the petitioners were initially appointed as teachers between June 2006 to October, 2007, against sanctioned posts of Lecturer (School Cadre) and Diploma in Physical Education (DPE) under the Director of Higher Education and as Physical Education Teachers (PET) and Drawing Master under the Director of Elementary Education, in the schools of the State Government, in accordance with their eligibility under the Parents Teacher Association (Grant-in-Aid) Rules, 2006. Learned counsel submits that as per the Government decision dated 16.08.2013, the teachers including the petitioners who were appointed through respective PTA’s and who had completed 7 years of such services were brought on government contract, in the month of January, 2015.

3. He submits that while working as Teachers, on contract basis, the State Government further took a decision on 11.05.2018, for regularizing the services of PTA contractual teachers on completion of three years of contractual service w.e.f. 1.4.2018 and though the respondents have granted the regularization to many other similarly placed and even junior incumbents from due date i.e. w.e.f. 1.4.2018 but the respondents were granted the benefit of regularization to the petitioner(s) in the month of August 2020 belatedly has resulting in treating the equals as unequal which is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

4. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the matter in issue, as to whether the contractual PTA-incumbents were to be granted regularization on completion of three years of contractual service, in terms of the Government decision dated 11.05.2018 w.e.f. 1.4.2018, the date on completion of three years of contractual service as PTA, stands adjudicated by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.342 of 2021, alongwith other connected matters, titled Yashwant Singh & Ors versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr., decided on 31.08.2022 (Annexure P-6).

5. The Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the SLP i.e. Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.6966 of 2023, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh versus Yashwant Singh & Ors, filed by State Authorities stands dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 24.4.2023; and the judgment in the case of Yaswant Singh (supra), also stands implemented by the respondents.

6. In the backdrop of the facts mentioned in Paras 1 to 5 above, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that once the respondents have granted the regularization to the teachers from the date of c