Disposed

Susheel Kumar v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC17 Sept 2026CWP/413/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, appointed as a daily wage Clerk on compassionate grounds in 2005, sought regularization from the date of initial appointment. His representations were rejected in 2023. He relied on a prior decision (Vikas Kumar) that was stayed by a Division Bench. Both parties agreed he could file a fresh representation after the pending LPA challenging that decision is decided. The court disposed of the petition directing the competent authority to consider and decide a fresh representation within six weeks after adjudication of LPA No. 194 of 2026.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider and decide petitioner's fresh representation in accordance with law, by a speaking order, within six weeks after adjudication of LPA No. 194 of 2026.

Susheel Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.413 of 2024

¶3

Decided on: 17.09.2026

¶4

_________________________________________________________________ Susheel Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of HP and Ors …Respondents ________________________________________________________________ Coram_

¶5

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶6

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

_________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for respondent No.1. Mr. Vedant Ranta, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 to 4.

¶8

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶9

Petitioner was appointed on compassionate

¶10

grounds on 28.06.2005 on daily wage basis as a Clerk. He

¶11

instituted this writ petition 08.01.2024 seeking direction to the respondents to consider his appointment as a regular Clerk from the date of initial appointment, alongwith all consequential service benefits. Petitioner’s representations in

¶12

this regard Annexures P-22 and P-24 were rejected on

¶13

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

¶14

¶15

22.09.2023 (Annexure P-26). Learned counsel further submitted that the relief claimed in this writ petition is covered by the decision rendered in Vikas Kumar vs. State

¶16

of H.P. and another² .

¶17

Learned Deputy Advocate General pointed out that aforesaid decision has been stayed by the Hon'ble Principal Division Bench vide order dated 01.07.2026 passed in CWP No. 15796 of 2025 (Aslam Mohammad vs. State of H.P. and others), alongwith connected matters including LPA No. 194 of 2026 (State of H.P. and another vs. Vikas Kumar).

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case petitioner is permitted to file fresh representation seeking applicability Vikas Kumar² in his case after adjudication of LPA No. 194 of 2026. Learned counsel for the respondents are not averse to this prayer.

¶19

4. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents/Competent Authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order, within six weeks, after adjudication of LPA No. 194 of

¶20

2 CWP No. 8032 of 2021 decided alongwith connected matters on 23.06.2025

¶21

¶22

2026 and in terms thereof.

¶23

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above

¶24

terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

¶25

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶26

September 17,2026 R.Atal

Susheel Kumar v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susheel Kumar v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases