##PAGE1##

2025:HHC:45490

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

AT SHIMLA

CWPOA No.3094 of 2019

Decided on: 23.12.2025

__________________________________________________________

Devender Kumar [since deceased]

Through his LRs ...Petitioners

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh and another

...Respondents

Coram o

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

Whether approved for reporting?. No

For the petitioner: Mr. Manish Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondents:u Mr. Navlesh Verma, Additional

Advocate General.

Ranjan Sharma, Judge

Original petitioner Devender Kumar [since

deceased] and 11 others, have filed Civil Writ Petition

No. 8143 of 2013, which was transferred to State

Administrative Tribunal; and upon abolition of Tribunal

i the matter came to be re-transferred to this Court, as

CWPOA No.3094 of 2019, seeking the following reliefs :-

“(i). The respondents may very kindly be

directed to consider the petitioners as

members of service in the cadre of

Lecturers (School Cadre) and to assign

them seniority as per Rules from the date

of their appointment.

(ii). That the respondents may kindly be

directed to give same pay scale to the

petitioners as is being paid to the regular

Lecturers (School Cadre) alongwith

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 04:52:20 :::CIS

- 2 - 2025:HHC:45490

increment as admissible under the law on

completion of one year of service and

arrears thereof be paid to the petitioners

alongwith interest. .

(iii). That the petitioners may kindly be given

the leave and other service benefits as is

being given to the regula.r appointed

Lecturers (School Cadre). The petitioner

may also be held entitled for all the

allowances which are being paid to the

regular teachers/Lecturers (School Cadre)

and after allowing the petitioners the

same allowances as is admissible to the

regular Lecturers (School Cadre), the

respondents may be directed to pay the

same alongwith interest to the petitioners.

(iv). That the respondents may kindly be

directed to deduct the amount from the

salary of the petitioners towards

o contributory Provident Fund from the date

of their initial appointment.

(v). That the contract which has been signed

by the petitioners may be held illegal to

the extent it deprives the petitioners from

h their rights being against the law and

public policy.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Grievance of the petitioners is that pursuant

to the Advertisement dated 17.02.2009 [Annexure

P-1] they were appointed as Lecturers (School Cadre),

on contract basis. It is averred that the appointment as

contractual Lecturers was dehors the Service Rules

of 1973 which provided for regular nomenclature

of appointment as School Lecturer. It is averred that

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 04:52:20 :::CIS

- 3 - 2025:HHC:45490

the contractual mode of appointment as Lecturer (School

Cadre) was inserted in the Recruitment & Promotion

Rules, as per Notification dated 11.06.2009 [Annexure

P-4] and therefore, in this background, it. is prayed

that the petitioners may be treated as regular appointees

School Lecturers from the date they were appointed

as Lecturers on contract basis with all consequential

benefits.

STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES IN REPLY-

AFFIDAVIT:

3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice, the

State Authorities have filed the Reply-Affidavit dated

21.02.2014 of Director of Higher Education, Himachal

Pradesh.

3(i). In the Reply-Affidavit State Authorities have

taken a stand that the contractual appointment was

given to the petitioners in view of Rule 15-A

of Recruitment and Promotion Rules whereby,

contractual nomenclature of recruitment was introduced

in said Rules and the petitioners have no valid claim for

regular appointment and therefore, the prayer of the

petitioners was opposed by the State Authorities.

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 04:52:20 :::CIS

- 4 - 2025:HHC:45490

INTERVENING DEVELOPMENTS:

4. During hearing, Learned Counsel for the

petitioners, places reliance on the judgmenPt of

Coordinate Bench of this Court in Ajay Kumar Thakur

and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and

others, CWPOA No.1695 of 2019, decid