Som Dutt vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1355

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RANJAN SHARMA
Som Dutt – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

Table of Content
1. liberty granted for benefit representations (Para 2)
2. 1973 rules mandated regular tgt appointments (Para 3)
3. state policy introduced contract recruitment post-2004 (Para 4 , 5)
4. policy decisions cannot override statutory rules (Para 8)
5. 2024 act retrospectively discriminatory, supports regularization (Para 9)
6. estoppel inapplicable against statutory rights (Para 10)
7. deem regular from initial appointment with benefits (Para 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Petitioners, Som Dutt, and eleven others Trained Graduate Teachers, have come up before this Court, seeking the following relief(s):-

“I. That the Rule 4.15-A (II), 15-A(Vii) (c), 15-A (Vii) (g), 15-A (vii) (h) of the Recruitment and Promotion rule dated 22.10.2009 vide Annexure P/2 framed for the appointment of Trained Graduate Teachers on contract basis may be declared Ultra Virus being the same opposed to the public policy and further being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

II. That the terms of format contract/ agreements vide Annexure P/1 entered by the respondents with the petitioners under the pressure of circumstances where the petitioners were on weaker footing and had unequal