IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3384 of 2024 Decided on: 9th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Niteesh Sharma and another …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.

For the Petitioners: Mru. Desh Raj Thakur, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No.1 C and 2.

Mr. Hamender Singh Chandel, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Whether respondent No.3 could be appointed on regular basis when the recruitment process in which he was selected, had advertised filling up the post on contract basis; In absence of any legal backing, was it open for the State to appoint respondent No.3 on regular basis against the post advertised to be filled up on contract basis merely on the ground that the said post was a carried forward

1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

vacancy of previous years as is contended by respondent No.3; Whether respondent No.3 on the basis of his such regular appointment order could steal march in seniority over the petitioners appointed in previous recru.itment process, but on contract basis; Whether State could discriminate in nature of appointment ord ers issued to incumbents of same selection proceoss, viz. regular to respondent No.3 & contractual to petitioners, are some of the questions involved in this petition.

2. Facts:-

2(i). Respondents No.1 and 2-Public Works Department sent a requisition to the H.P. Public Service Commission on 24.11.2008 (Annexure R-I) for filling up of number of posts of Assistant Engineers (Civil), Class-I (Gazetted) in the pay scale of Rs.7880-13500/- through direct recruitment on regular basis. One such post was to H be filled up from Ex-serviceman (UR) category. The said post advertised for Ex-serviceman (UR) remained unfilled.

2(ii). Another advertisement was issued by the respondent-Department on 04.02.2012 for filling up number of posts of Assistant Engineers category wise on contractual basis. The post falling to the category of Ex-serviceman (UR) that remained unfilled in the previous selection process, was advertised once again for filling up under this second advertisement dated 04.02.2012. The post remained unfilled even under this advertisement.

2(iii). Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission issued another advertisement on 01.09.2012 (Annexure P-2) for filling up 12 posts of Assistant Engineers on contract basis including one posto for General Ex- Serviceman (UR Ex-SM) of H.P. The said post was carried forward as unfilled vacancy from previous years. The petitioners participated iun the recruitment process under this advertisement and emerged successful. Vide notification dated 16.05.2013 (Annexure P-3), they were appointed as Assistant Engineers on contract basis on the recommendations of H.P. Public Service Commission on fixed contractual amount. The carried forward vacancy reserved for UR Ex-SM remained vacant.

2(iv). Further advertisement was issued by the H.P.

Public Service Commission on 11.10.2013 (Annexure P-4), inviting applications for various posts including one backlog post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) against UR Ex-SM to be filled up on contract basis. Respondent No.3 applied under the advertisement for the said post. Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission declared the result of the selection process for recruitment to the said post on 28.01.2014. Name of respondent No.3 was recommended to the respondent-Department for appointment as Assistant Engineer (Civil) against General Ex-Serviceman ca.tegory (Annexure P-5). Appointment order was issued to respondent No.3