IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.8174 of 2023

Decided on: 18th December, 20.25

-------------------------------------------------------------------------P------------

Vinod Kumar Sood and others …..Petitioners

Versus H

State of H.P. and others .....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram o

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Du a

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the Petitioners: uMr. V.S. Chauhan, Senior Advocate

with Mr. Arsh Chauhan, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy

Advocate General.

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

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

This writ petition has been filed for the grant of

following substantive reliefs:-

“(i) To issue necessary writ, direction, or order in the nature

i thereof directing the respondents for stepping up of pay

H of petitioners from the date when their junior started

getting higher salary and to remove pay anomalies and

grant them pay/salary at par with their juniors.

(ii) To issue necessary writ, direction, or order in the nature

thereof directing the respondents to fix quota for the

promotion of Principal amongst Lecturer/PGT.

(iii) To issue necessary direction, order or writ thereby

directing the respondents not to make amended Rules applicable in the case of petitioners as their appointment was prior to 2010 as well as a common Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

seniority prepared/maintained Graduate Teachers subject/stream.”

2. The case set up by the petitioners is that they.

were appointed as Trained Graduate Teachers (TGTs) prior to 26.04.2010 and were thereafter promoted as Lecturers in different streams. Prior to 26.04.2010, one common seniority list of all TGTs irrespectivef of their streams/ subjects was being maintained by the respondent- Department for the purpose of promotion to the posts of Headmaster/Lecturer. Pertitioners allege that their juniors in the common seniority list were promoted prior to them. Hence, they seek stepping-up of their pay from the date their alleged juniors started getting higher salary, for removing the stated pay anomaly.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file.

i4. The relief as prayed for by the petitioners cannot be granted to them. The claim of the petitioners is not only barred by the principles of delay, laches and acquiescence, but can also not be granted to them in view of Neelam Kaushal Versus State of H.P. & others2, which was disposed of with following directions:-

2 CWP(T) No.14932 of 2008, decided on 26.7.2010

“13. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this petition is disposed of with the following directions:

a. That no promotions made prior to 26th April 2010 shall be affected by the outcome of this petition. .

However, since the promotions made after 26^th April,2010 were made expressly subject to the result of this petition they shall abide by the following directions.

b. That henceforth and w.e.f 26th April,2010 before making any promotions to the post of Lecturers or Head Masters an option shall b e sought from the concerned employee. f c. Once an employee giveso an option he/she will not be permitted to change the option.

d. Once an employee opts to be promoted as Lecturer/

Head Master he tcan not claim that he should be considered forr the other post.

e. The uPrincipal Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, the Director of Higher Education and Director of Elementary Education i.e respondents No. 1 to 3 are made personally responsible for compliance of these Cdirections in letter and spirit.

f. All promotions, if any, made after 26th April,2010 shall be reviewed and after seeking options of the employees in terms of the aforesaid directions the promotions shall be made.”

In terms of above decision, promotions made prior to 26.04.2010 were not to be affected by the outcome of the decision. The promotions made after 26.