Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RANJAN SHARMA
Salochna Devi – Appellant
Versus
Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim for adhoc service regularization benefits. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. adhoc promotions exceeded 15% class-iv quota. (Para 3) |
| 3. uninterrupted adhoc service counts for seniority. (Para 4) |
| 4. excess quota service denies seniority benefits. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 5. adhoc service dehors rules/quota not for seniority. (Para 6) |
| 6. petition dismissed; rejection order upheld. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Petitioner, Salochna Devi, initially filed CWP No.3434 of 2011 before this Court, which upon creation of Learned State Administrative Tribunal; was transferred to said Tribunal and upon abolition of Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court as CWPOA No.3788 of 2019, seeking the following relief:-
“(ii) That the impugned order dated 20.05.2010 (Annexure P-1), may kindly be quashed and set aside and the petitioner’s adhoc service may kindly be ordered to be regularized w.e.f. 28.06.1991 to 17.11.1995 with all consequential benefits including arrears, promotion etc.”
FACTUAL MATRIX:
2. Grievance of the petitioner is that she was appointed as Class-IV in Respondent-Board and she joined on 19.12.1987 as Peon [Class-IV Non-Technical] and was promoted as Clerk on ad
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
