Meena Kumari vs State of H. P. - 2024 Supreme(HP) 177

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(HP) 177

RANJAN SHARMA
Meena Kumari – Appellant
Versus
State of H. P. – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the order intended to be passed herein.

3. The petitioner has come up before this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i) That appointment of petitioners from initial date of appointment (since they joined as TGTs on contract basis) may be considered as regular appointment in accordance with R&P rules of 1973, and contract appointment of petitioners may kindly declared as illegal, null and void being contrary to R&P rules.

(ii) Respondents further directed to regular appointment to petitioners from give initial date of appointment or contract appointment of the petitioners may kindly be treat as regular appointment against the post of Trained Graduate Teacher from the initial date of their appointment with all consequential benefits.

(iii) That the respondents may further be directed to grant all consequential benefits like seniority, arrears, increment, interest @9% per annum with effect from the date when the same fe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document