LAWS(HPH)-2011-4-66

DIGVIJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF H P

Decided On April 04, 2011
DIGVIJAY SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Digvijay Singh, who is a contractual appointee being Lecturer in Physics, was posted at Government Senior Secondary School Shiva Badar, Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi, vide order dated 21.10.2010 (Annexure P-1). He submitted his joining report on 21.10.2010 (Annexure P-3) at Government Senior Secondary School Shiva Badar, Distt. Mandi. The said joining report was forwarded by the Director to the Principal of the school vide Annexure P-2. The petitioner alleges that he was never impleaded as a party in the writ petition filed by respondent No. 4 Deep Shikha and Annexure P-4, order dated 19.11.2010, was passed by the Director referring to the order passed by this Court on 29.9.2010 in CWP No. 6153 of 2010, which reads as under:-

(2.) A perusal of the interim order dated 29.9.2010 shows that the petitioner was not impleaded as a party. It appears that she alleged that respondent No. 4 Sanjeev Kumar was a affected party and she impleaded him and the order was passed by the Director transferring her to Shiva Badar and respondent No. 4 Sanjeev Kuar was posted at Government Senior Secondary School Sudhar, District Mandi. A perusal of the order passed by this Court Annexure R-4/3, shows that the petitioner is not a party to the petition, but one Sanjeev Kumar was impeladed as respondent No. 4. It refers to the interim order dated 29.9.2010 referred to above. However, a perusal of the order Annexure R-4/6 dated 11.11.2010 passed in CWP No. 6153 of 2010 shows that the petitioner was impeladed as a party in the petition. In view of the interim order passed by this Court on 29.9.2010, respondent No. 4 was adjusted at Government Senior Secondary School Shiva Badar. However, a perusal of the order placed on record today shows that CWP No. 6153 of 2010 was decided on 11.11.2010 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn. Therefore, it is clear that no final orders were passed in CWP No. 6153 of 2010.

(3.) IN view of the above discussion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner stands allowed accordingly.