- Court
- High Court of Himachal Pradesh
- Decided
- 10 September 2026
- Bench
- Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge, Yogesh Jaswal
- Case no.
- CWP 3128/2020
Follow Himachal Pradesh High CourtFollow Ajay Mohan GoelFollow JudgeFollow Yogesh Jaswal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.3128 of 2020
Decided on 10th September 2026 Smt. Sunita Nadda and others
…Petitioners Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others
…Respondents Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yogesh Jaswal, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners : Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. V.S. Kanwar,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional
Advocate General, for
respondents No.1 to 3.
Respondents No.4, 5 and 28 are
already ex parte.
Mr. Gambhir Singh Chauhan,
Advocate, vice Mr. Surender
Verma, Advocate, for respondents
No.6 to 27 and 29 to 31.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-
"i. That the notification dated 25.11.1998 Ann. P-1
may be declared null and void in the eyes of law
as per the submissions made herein above.
ii. That the R&P Rules Ann. P-10 framed for the
post of Assistant Regional Transport Officer dated
20.6.2020 and proposed R&P rules RTO may be
declared null and void in the interest of justice
being ultra vires and in any case the promotion
done by the department for those posts, that may
be subject to the decision of the present case.
iii. That the Recruitment and Promotion Rules for
the Himachal Pradesh Transport Department
Class-III Service (Recruitment Promotion and
Certain Conditions Of Service) Rules, 1978 be
declared valid operative and applicable as on the
date of appointment of the Petitioners these rules
exists and has not been repealed and amended
at that time and the appointment of the
Petitioners has been done as per the Notification
dated 9.8.1978.
iv. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the
respondent authorities to create further
promotional avenues for the post presently held
by the present petitioner i.e. Steno typist by
framing and notifying recruitment and promotion
Rules or by creating such suitable post to which
the petitioner can be promoted and the case may
be treated as special case for the further
promotion for the aforesaid post."
2.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that in light of notification dated 18.06.2012 (Annexure RA-2) appended with the rejoinder filed by the petitioners, the petitioner would be satisfied, in case, the respondents are directed to consider their case for further promotion as per said notification.
3.
We are of the considered view that it is for the petitioners to approach the Authority in this regard.
4.
However, as a matter of indulgence, we dispose of this petition without adjudicating the issues raised therein on merit with the observation that the petitioners shall be at liberty to approach the Authority for the consideration of their case of regularization in terms of notification dated 18.06.2012. It is clarified that we are not expressing any opinion on the merit of the case either way.
5.
In the event of the petitioners filing any representation before the Authority within four weeks from today, then, an endeavour be made to decide the same in accordance with law within twelve weeks from the date of the receipt thereof. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
(Yogesh Jaswal)
Judge September 10, 2026 (Vinod)
Source: High Court of Himachal Pradesh, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.