Whereas in view of the advise of the Law Department, the

Department has filed SLP (Civil) Diary No. 22215/2022 titled as State of H.P. &Ors Vs
Satish Kumar & Ors in the Honble Apex Court against the judgment pronounced by the
Hon'ble High Court of H.P. in CWPOANo. 3435/2020 titled as Satish Kumar & ors Vs
State of H.P & ors dated 27.11.2021.
Whereas, the petitioner Sh. Satish Kumar has filed COPC No.
207/2022 in CWPOANo. 3435/2020 in O.A. No. 3001/2018 titled as Satish Kumar Vs
State of H.P, & ors which was listed before the Hon'ble High Court of HP on 30.09.2022
and the same was heard for considerable time. During the course of arguments, the
instructions dated 23.08.2022 was placed on record and the Ld. Additional- Advocate
General apprised the Hon'ble Court about the filing of SLP against the judgment dated
27.11.2021. However, the Hon'ble Court has observed that until unless there is stay from
the Hon'ble Apex Court, pendency of SLP cannot be any help in the way of implementation
of the judgment. The case has been ordered to be listed on 9 December, 2022.
Whereas, the matter was again taken up with the Government vide
letter No. EDN-H(2)B(2)3435/2020-CC dated 14.11.2022 and the Government vide letter
No. EDN-C-E(4)2/2019-L dated 01.12.2022 conveyed the opinion of the Law Department
and the Law Department advised that since the SLP (Civil) No. 22215/2022 titled as State
of H.P. &Ors Vs Satish Kumar &Ors filed by the State is pending adjudication before the
Hon'ble Apex Court and cOPC No. 20712022 in CWP (Original Application) N. 3435 of
2020 is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble High Court, therefore, the Department is
advised to consult the Ld. Advocate General, HP. on the issue raised by them being
incharge of the present controversy before the Hon'ble High Court.
Whereas, in view of advise of the Law Department, the matter was
referred to the Learned Advocate General vide this Department leter No.EDN
H(2)B(2)3435/2020-CC dated 05.12.2022 a& 18.04.2023.
Whereas, the COPC No. 207/2022 in CWPOA No. 3435/2020 in
0.A: No. 3001/2018 titled as Satish Kumar Vs State of HP. & ors was again listed before
the Hon'ble High Court on 21.04.2023 when after hearing the matter for some time the
Hon'ble High Court has passed the following order:
*Learned Additional Advocate General has apprised the Court
that though SLP has been filed, but no stay has been granted. Since, there is no stay on
the implementation of the judgment of this court, let the same be implemented
forthwith and compliance affidavit be filed within one week. List on 01.05.2023."
 No:EDN-H(2)B(2)3435/2020---CC
Directorate of Elementary Education,
Himachal Pradesh Lal Pani Shimla-01.
Dated Shimla-171001 the April, 2023
In the matter of CWPOANo. 3435/2020 titled as
State of HP and other decided on Satish Kumar and others Vs
27.11.2021.
ORDER

Whereas, the CWPOA No. 3435/2020 titled as Satish Kumar &

others Vs State of Hirmachal Pradesh & Ors was listed
before the Hon'ble High Court of
H.P. on 27.11.2021 when after hearing the matter the Hon'ble
High Court has passed
the following orders:
"As observed above, the result of the selection was
duly
declared 'by the Board on 20.10.2002 and the said
recommendations forwarded to
respondent No. 2, who was simply to issue the appointment letters. Even if, thís
selection process was to be delayed for any reason, the same could not have been
delayed beyond six months and, therefore, in the given circumstances, the petitioner
would be deemed to have been appointed at least on and with effect from 1" May,
2003. Once that be so, obviously, the provisions of the Rules of 2006 would not come
in the way of the petitioners.
There is yet another reason to grant this benefit to the
petitioners as it is not in dispute that the process for filling up 25%% posts by way of
promotion was initiated about the same time and completed on 23.04.2002 pursuant
to the recommendations of the DPC on 26.02.2002. In such circumstances, it will be
totally unfair, unjust and otherwise illegal to deprive the petitioners of their right
being appointed.
In the given facts and circumstances, we find merit in this
petition, The impugned Office Orders. dated 05.04.2018 (Annexures A-14 and A-15)
are quashed and set aside. The petitioner shall be deemed to be appointed on 1"
may, 2003, alongwith all consequential benefits. However, since, the petitioners have
not worked on the posts, therefore, they will not be entitled to any monetary benefits
from the deemed date of the appointments.
The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms, leaving the
parties to bear their own costs."
already filed CWP No. 1811/2008 titled as Dev Raj Vs
State of H.P. & Others for regular
appointment and same was decided by the Hon'ble High Court on dated
14-11-2011 The
operative part of the order is as under:
"In view of the above discussion, all the
writ petitions are
allowed and the petitioners except the petitioners in CWP No. 7376 of
2010 shall be
deemed to be regular employees of the State Government from the date of
their
appointment. As far as the petitioners in CWP No. 7376 of 2010 are concerned they
shall be deemed to be regular teachers from the dates their
colleagues were offered
contractual appointment in the year 2009 and have now to be treated as regular
employee. Their earlier appointment on contractual basis or as para teachers will
not be counted towards seniority and their seniority shall be
governed as per the
merit list of the Subordinate Selection Board. The petitioners shall be entitled to all
consequential benefits.
The writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms and the
respondent-State is directedto grant all financial benefits to the petitioners latest by
31 March, 2012 failing which the State shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% per
annum".

Whereas, against the above orders, the Govermment had filed LPA
No. 367I2012 titled as State of Himachal Pradesh & others Vs Smt. Gopi Devi Thakur
and another which was decided by the Hon'ble High Court on dated 23-12-2014. The
operative part ofjudgment is as under:
The appellants-writ respondents were directed to consider the
case of the writ petitioner-respondent No. 1, herein, in terms of the judgment passed
by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 1811 of 2008, titled as Dev Raj Versus State
of H.P. & others, alongwith other connected matters, decided on 14.11.2011.
The appellants-writ respondents have considered the case of
the writ petitioner and came to the conclusion that she was eligible for the relief, in
terms of the Dev Raj's case, Supra. She was appointed as Steno Typist on regular
basis vide order dated 17.03.2012 (Annexure R-1/2). Thus, the appellants-writ
respondents have complied with the court directions.
We have perused the pleadings, record and the impugned
judgment and are of the considered view that the Writ Court has rightly directed the
writ-respondents to consider the case of the writ petitioner. The impugned judgment
is speaking and legal one.

3
 Whereas, in view of the order of the Hon°ble High Court of H.P.
the case of the petitioners is examined
thoroughly and it is revealed that during 2002, the
Department placed requisition to HPSSSB Hamirpur to fill-up 224 posts of
247 posts of TGT (NM) and 273 posts of TGT (Arts),
TGT (Medical) on regular basis. In response to
the Department requisition, the Secretary,
HPSSSB, Hamirpur after completion of all
codal formalities recommended the selection list of
TGT NM & Medical vide letter
No.HPSSSB-B(2)258/2002-3533 dated 10.12.2002 & No.HPSSSB-B(2)259/2002-3532
dated 10.12.2002 and the nane of the
petitioners Sh. Satish Kumar, Sh. Pawan Kumar &
Sh. Narender Kumar was
recommended at Sr. No. 18, 86 & 99 resepectively n the
selection list of TGT (NM) and the name of the
petitioners Sh. Aman Dev & Sanjay
Kumar was recommended at Sr. No. 86 & 107
respectively in the selection list of TGT
(Medical). The Recommendation of TGT (Arts) was not received as
the personal
interview was not held by the Secretary, HPSSSB, Hamirpur at that time.
Thereafter,
whole process of appointment and interview was stopped due to
vigilance inquiry and as
per Government instructions issued vide letter No
2003. Later on, the Govt. vide its letter No:
PER(AP-C)B(19)-1/2003 dated 13-03
Shiksha-II-kha (1)3/98-Loose dated 28.8.08 &
30.7.09 accorded approval to appoint TGT Medical and TGT
Non-Medical purely on
contract basis as recommended by the HPSSSB, Hamipur in the year of
2002 and
accordingly the Depatment offered appointment to the elig+ble candidates as well as
petitioners as TGT (Medical) & TGT (NM) purely on contract basis on
07.10.2008 &.
24.08.2009 respectively. The selection process for the post of TGT Arts was not
completed by HPSSSB, Hamirpur in the year of 2002 as the interview process was
not started by HPSSSB, Hamirpur in the year of 2002 and the
samne was completed
in the year of 2012 as per order of the Hon'ble High Court of HP. passed in
CWP
No: 3513/2009 Manoj Kumar Vs State of H.P. and others dated
03.08.2010 from
the stage it was stopped. In compliance of the High Court orders the Secretary, HPSSSB
Hamirpu recommended the selection list of 219 candidates of TGT (A) vide letter No.
HP.SSSB-B(2)-257/2002-40499 dated 17.10.2011 and the name of the petitioners Sh.
Bhishan Dev & Sh. Amit Sharma was recommended at Sr. No. 23 & 24 in the selection
list. Thereafter, as per approval conveyed by the Government vide letter No.
Shiksha-II
kha(1)3/98-Vol-II dated 162.2012, appointment was offered by the Department to
selected candidates as well as petitioners vide office order No. EDN-H(2)B(2)6/2011
Arts-HPSSSB dated 21.02.2012.
Whereas, the candidates appointed by the Department in the year of
2008, 2009 & 2012 on contract basis (Selected through HPSSSB Hamipur 2002) had
 Having glance on the aforesaid discussion, the
impugned
judgment is upheld and the appeal merits to be dismissed. Ordered
accordingly.
Whereas, the Department of Elementary Education H.P. filed a
separate LPA No. 237/2012 titled as State of Himachal Pradesh &
another Vs Manju Bala
against the order of Hon'ble High Court of H.P. passed in CWP No.
1811/2008 dated
14.11.201l1. The operative part ofjudgment passed in LPA No. 237/2012 is as under:
The issue involved in these LPAs and writ petitions
stands
already determined by this Court in LPA No. 367 of 2012, titled as
State, of
Himachal Pradesh & others Versus Gopi Devi Thakur and another, decided on
23"December, 2014. The judgment passed in the aforesaid LPA, shall govern all
these LPAs and writ petitions. Copy of that
judgment/order shall form part of this
judgment also.
The LPAs and writ petitions stands disposed of alongwith
pending applications, if any.
Whereas, as per approval conveyed by the Government vide letter
No. EDN-C-E(5)4/2015 dated 05-11-2016 issued in compliance to the order of the Hon'ble
High Court passed in CWP No. 1811/2008 dated 14.11.2011, the Department vide
letter
No. EDN-H(2)B(2)4273/12- CC dated 07-11-2016,. considered all the petitioners as
deemed regular employees of the State Government from the date of their initial
appointment on contract basis as per order of the Hon'ble High Court subject to the final
outcome of SLP No. 1171/2017 titled as State of H.P. & other Vs Manju Bala as the
-Government had challenged the order of Hon'ble High Court passed in LPA No. 237/2012
titled as State of Himachal Pradesh & another Vs Manju Bala on dated 30-05-2015. The
petitioners were not given arrear of financial benefits due to pendency of above said SLP.
Later on, the Hon'ble Apex Court in above referred Special Leave to Appeal (C)...cC
No(s)1171/2017 on dated 24.03.2017 had passed the following orders:
We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order
except to direct that the respondent will not be entitled to arrears of financial benefits.
The Special Leave Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications are also
disposed of" (copy enclosed).
Whereas, in view of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, vide this
Directorate letter No. EDN-H(2)B(2)4273/12 CCdated 31-03-2017, all the appointees of
2008, 2009 & 2012 selected through HPSSSB, Hamirpur on the basis of requisition of 2002
were considered deemed regular employees of the State Government from the date of their
initial appointment on contract basis and airears of-financial benefits was not granted to
6. Amit Sharma Slo Sh. Bhim Ch: d Sharma, presently working as Trained Grad
uate Teacher (Arts) in Govem:ent High School Dev Nagar (Moolbari), Dist.
Shimla, R/o Shiva Lodge,Lowe. Totu, Shimla-11 H.P.
7. Bhisham Dev, S/o Sh. Chura Rant Sharma, aged about 43 years, presently work
ing as Trained Graduate Teacher (Arts) in Govern1ment Boys Senior Secondary
School Solan, rlo flat No. 10, Block D, Sugandha. Apartment, South Enclave,
Saproon, Solan HP.
8. Narender Kumar, Slo Satinder Kumar, aged about 40 years, presently working
as Trained Graduate Teacher (Non-Medical) in Government Middle School
Kather, Distt. Solan R/o Vill. Chaknahat, P.O. Shardaghat, Tehsil Kandaghat,
Dist. Solan HP.

9. Pawan Kumar Sharma Slo Sh. Ntunshi Ram, presently working as Trained
Graduate Teacher (Non-Medical) in Government High School Barara, R/o Vill.
Jhatwar, P.0. Dugli, Tehsil & Distrist Hamirpur H.P. 177029.10.
10 Sanjay Kuamr S/o Dharam Das Sharma, aged about 47 years, presently work
ing as Lecturer (Political Science) in Government Senior Secondary School
Bhagehar Langesar (Mandi) rlo V&PO Chobin. Tehsil Baijnath. Distt.Kangra.
(HP) Pin code 176128.
11 The Dealing Assistant, Seniority Seat (TGTS), Dte. of Elem, Education H.P.
12 Guard file.

Director Elementary Education,

Himachal Pradesh.

29 APR 2023
them as per order of the Hon'ble Supreme court passed on
dated 24.03.2017. Seniority has
also been given to them on notional basis from the
date of their initial appointment on
conctract basis as directed by the Hon'ble High Court of H.P. in CWP No.
1811/2011 titled
as Dev Raj Vs State of H.P. & Others.

Whereas, feeling aggrieved from this Department office order

No.EDN-H(2)B(9)-412018-TGT Final Sty dated 05.04.2018 vide which seniority numbers
were allotted to the appointees of 2008, 2009 & 2012 as per directions of the
Hon'ble High
Court of H.P., the petitioner in the instant case Sh. Satish Kumar & five others filed
0.A.
No. 3001/2018 titled as Satish Kumar Vs State of H.P. & others in
the Hon'ble H.P.
Administrative Tribunal for the following relief:
a) Quash the impugned Office orders dated 05.04.2018 (Annexure
A-14 and 15) being arbitrary, malafide and illegal;
b) Direct the respondents to deem the applicant to have been
appointed from the year 2002 with all consequential benefits for
all purposes and intents alongwith arrears fo salary etc with
interest thereon @ 18% pa till date;
Whereas, the above said original application was later on transferred
to the Hon"ble High Court of H.P. as CWPOA No. 3435/2020 titled as Satish Kumar &
others and State of H.P. & others and the Hon'ble High Court of H.P. in its order dated
27.11.2021 has quashed this Directorate office order No. EDN-H(2)B(9)-4/2018-TGT Final
Sty dated 05.04.2018 and ordered thatthe petitioner shall be deemed to be appointed on
1" may, 2003, alongwith all consequential benefits.7
Whereas, the mater was taken up with the Government vide letter
No. EDN-H(2)B(2)3435/2020-CC dated 24.03.2022 and the Government vide letter No.
EDN-C-E(4)2/2019 dated 04.05.2022 conveyed the opinion of the Law Department. The
relevant part of the opinion is as under:
this Department is of the considered opinion that ince the
petitioners have been appointed in the year 2008-09 and 2012 and not in the year 2003
from which year they are claiming seniority and consequential benefits as such
seniority cannot be assigned to them from the date when they have not borne in the
cadre, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.
6967 of 2013 titled as State of Utter Pradesh and others Vs Ashok Kumar Srivastava
and others. Therefore, the Deparfment is advised to assail the order passd by the
Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in CWPOA No. 3435
of 2020 before the Hon'ble Apex Cuurt."
 Whereas, the matter was discussed with the Learned Advocate
General on 26.04.2023 and the Learned Advocate General has advised that subject to
final outcome of SLP () Diary No. 22215/2022, the petitioners in CWPOA No.
3435/2020 may be granted seniority from their deemed date of appointment as per
judgment. The court has clarified thet- petitioners are not entitled for any monetary
benefits for deemed appointments, which shall include 'increments' also. Accordingy
implement the judgment."
In view of above facts and circumstances, I am of the considered
view that since the Department has iled SLP in the Hon'ble Apex Court vide SLP(C)
Diary No. 22215/2022 titled as the State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Vs Satish Kunmar
&Ors against the order passed in CWPOA No. 3435/2020 titled as Satish Kumar &
othets and State of H.P. &others 27.11.2021, however, in view of the order of the
Hon'ble High Court of HP. passed in COPC No. 207/2022 in CWPOA No. 3435/2020
in O.A. No. 3001/2018 titled a_ Satish Kumar Vs State of H.P., &ors dated
21.04.2023 and as advised by the Learned Advocate General, H.P., the petitioners are
hereby considered deemed appointed on regular basis w.e.f. 01.05.2003 alongwith all
consequntial benefits subject to final outcome of SLP(C) Diary No. 22215/2022 titled
as the State -of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Vs Satish Kumar & Ors, however, the

petitioners are not entitled for any monetary benefits which include increments also. The
dealing assistant, seniority seat of TGTs is also directed to re-assign the seniority number
to the petitioner subject to final outcome of the SLP(C) Diary No, 22215/2022 titled as
the State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Vs Satish Kurmar & Ors.

Director Élementary Education,

Himachal Pradesh.
EndstNo:Even Dated: April, 2023
Copy forwarded for information and n/a to:
1. The District Attorney, Directorate of Elementary Education H.P. Shimla-01
W.r.t. CWPOA lbid.
2. The Dy. Director of Elementary Education,Kangra, Shimla, Solan & Una Distt.
of H.P.
3. The concernd Prinèipal/Headmaster of the School.
4. Satish Kumar, S/o Sh. Narayan Chand, aged about 45 years,
presently working
as Lecturer (Maths) in Government Senior Secondary School Pratha, Dist. So
lan R/o Vill. Damod, P.O. Jasana, Tehsil Bangana, Distt. Una HP.
5. Aman Dev S/o Sh. Subhash Chand Garg, presently
Trained Graduate Teacher
(Medical) in Government Senior Secondary School Takoli, R/o VPO Sohari,
Tehsil BanganåDistrict Una HP. 177039.