Petitioner challenged the regularity of her contract appointment under the 3% disability quota seeking conversion to regular service citing prior high court precedent; petition disposed of pending internal representation outcome.
None granted; petition disposed of in view of representation filed with authorities pending decision.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No. 3102 of 2024 Decided on:20.09.2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
____________________________________________________ Anita Kumari
……….. petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another respondents
____________________________________________________ Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Gautam Sood, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Bipin Chander Negi, Judge ( oral)
The petitioner was appointed as a TGT (NonMedical) on 07.09.2021. The aforesaid appointment of the petitioner was against the 3% quota meant for person with disability as is evident from its order dated 7th September, 2021 appended alongwith the present petition as Annexure P-2. A perusal of the office order Annexure P-2 reflects that the appointment of the petitioner has been made on a contract basis. 2. The petitioner contends in the writ petition that her initial appointment should have been on regular basis. In this respect, petitioner is seeking the benefits of law laid down by this Court in CWPOA No.1077 of 2019, titled Nitin Kumar Vs. State of HP & anr., decided on 22.08.2022, wherein it has been held
1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
that a person appointed under the 3% quota meant for person
with disability is to be appointed on a regular basis.
List for compliance on 23.10.2024.
(Bipin Chander Negi) Judge
September 20, 2024 tarun
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's initial contract appointment under the 3% disability quota should have been on a regular basis as per this Court's earlier ratio.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nitin Kumar Vs. State of HP & anr.Referred¶7
CWPOA No.1077 of 2019, Nitin Kumar Vs. State of HP & anr.
Anita Kumari
State of H.P.
Bipin Chander Negi
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
