IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
CWP No.1724 of 2020
Decided on: 08 th May, 2026
Krishan Kumar. .. Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others ...Respondents
Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge
For the petitioner: rMr. Kush Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondenuts: Mr. Amit Kumar Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General.
08 th May, 2026
( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj )
Judge
(ankit)
2026:HHC:15808
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No.1724 of 2020
Decided on: 08 th May, 2026 __________________________________________________________________ Krishan Kumar. .. Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents
_________________________________________________________________
Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge
Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: rMr. Kush Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondenuts: Mr. Amit Kumar Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General.
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral)
By way of present petition, the petitioner has
sought direction to the respondents to re-engage him as
gPhysical Education Teacher (hereinafter referred to as “PET”)
in Government Senior Secondary School Saddun Bargran (hereinafter referred to as “the School”) with all consequential
benefits.
2. The facts which emerge from the pleadings are that the petitioner was appointed as PET on Parent Teacher Association (hereinafter referred to as “PTA”) basis w.e.f.
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2026 08:54:07 :::CIS
##PAGE2##2
01.11.2004. However, his services were terminated vide ofÏce
order dated 03.08.2012 (Annexure P-4) on joiningP of a regular hand. Later on, the State Government had take.n the decision to engage all those PTA appointees, whose services were disengaged for the reasons other than a departmental inquiry. The petitioner on the basis of the said decision taken by the State Government, made a representation to the Sub Divisional OfÏcer (Civil), Kangra, who vide Inquiry Report dated 30.11.2014, came to the conclusion that there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was ever issued any show-cause notice before withholding of the pay out of PTA GIA. The statement of the Principal of the School that the
H petitioner was not appointed as per PTA GIA Policy, 2006, is also not tenable in view of the letter dated 22.05.2014, which states that the Government had decided to re-engage all the PTA provided teachers who were engaged before 31.12.2007 and whose services were discontinued due to the reasons other than the inquiry committee, if they are otherwise
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2026 08:54:07 :::CIS
##PAGE3##3
eligible as per the R&P Rules and GIA be released in their
favour. P
3. It was also noticed in the inquiry r.eport that the post of DPE was lying vacant in the School and the Sub Divisional OfÏcer (Civil), Kangra, had recommended that the Principal of the School may re-engage the petitioner on the post of DPE, if otherwise eligible as per the R&P Rules of the Department of Education Government of H.P. Despite the said decision having been taken by the competent authority, the petitioner was not re-engaged on the post of DPE. The petitioner despite approaching the authorities was not re- engaged and thereafter he has approached this Court
H seeking direction to the respondents to re-engage him as PET in the School with all consequential benefits.
4. The petitioner has placed on record copy of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.6279 of 2021, titled, Bal Ram vs. State of H.P. and others, decided on 01.07.2022, wherein this Court had given directions to the
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2026 08:54:07 :::CIS
##PAGE4##4
respondents to re-engage the petitioner as PET on PTA basis
in the same school, where the petitioner was wPorking and since the petitioner is similarly situate and wa.s also working in the same School where Sh. Bal Ram was appointed, he may
also be extended the same relief.
5. The respondents filed reply to the petition through respondent No.2 and averred that the petitioner was initially appointed as PET on PTA basis in the respondent- Department i.e. at Government High School Saddun Bargran, District Kangra, H.P. on 01.11.2004 (wrongly mentioned as 01.11.2024). Thereafter, the said school was upgraded to the level of Government Senior Secondary School Saddun
H Bargran, District Kangra, H.P. and pe
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.