IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6823 of 2025 Date of Decision: 17.09.2025 __________________________________________________________

Rajesh Kumar Jhanji …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

….Respondents ______________________________________f____________________

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting? ¹ Yes.

For the Petitioner: Mr. M.L. Sharma and Ms. Meghna Kashava, Advocates.

For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr.

Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.

oVerma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr.

Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for CState.

__________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):

By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main reliefs:-

i “a. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to sanction Grant-in-Aid in favour of the petitioner for the period he has been working on the post of Lecturer (Commerce) on PTA basis in GSSS Kunihar from 10.10.2008 till date except for a break from 02.07.2014 to 11.05.2018 due to the joining of a contract teacher.

b. To direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer (Commerce) w.e.f the date the services of similarly situated persons as indicated in Annexure-P/12 have been regularized with concomitant financial benefits with interest @ 12% per annum from the due date till payment thereof.

1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

c. To quash impugned order dated 03.01.2019 Annexure.-P/8 being arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional, void and illegal.”

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties are that on 10.10.2008, petitioner herein, who possessesf degrees of M.Com and B.Ed, was selected against the post of Lecturer (Commerce) by PTA of Government Senior Secondary School, Kunihar. W.e.f 10.10.2008 till 01.07.2014, petitioner kept on rdischarging his duties in afore school on PTA basis, but w.e.f. 02.07.2014, he was not permitted to work in the said post due to appointment of a contract teacher on the same post in the school cConcerned. In the month of April, 2018, post of Lecturer (Commerce) again fell vacant in Government Senior Secondary School, Kunihar and vide order dated 11.05.2015, petitioner was again greengaged on the of post of Lecturer (Commerce) in Government Senior iSecondary School Kunihar by School Management Committee (in short “SMC”). From afore date, petitioner is still continuing. In the year 2018, petitioner filed CWP No.2264 of 2018 for release of Grant-in-Aid in his favour under Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006, but afore writ petition was disposed of by this Court with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation within one week with further direction to the competent authority to decide the same within two months. However, vide order dated 03.01.2019, representation filed by the petitioner was rejected. Petitioner, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order, again filed CWP No.732 of 2019. Though afore writ petition was dismissed, vide judgment dated 02.12.2019, but petitioner filed LPA No.2 of 2020, which was also withdrawn by him on 22.09.2023 with liberty to file review petition before learned Single Judge. In the year 2023, petitioner filed Review Petition No.47 of 2024 for review of judgment dated 02.12.2019 in CWP No.732 of 2019. Vide order 03.01.2025, afore review petition was allowed by learned Single Judge, as a result thereof, CWP No.732 of 2019 came to bet restored to its original number. On 10.10.2022, during pendency of the afore writ petition, Government extended the Grant-in-Aid Policy and also directed to regularize the services of the PTA appointed teachers, who were appointed after

03.01.2008 i.e. after closure of the Grant-in-Aid Policy.

3.