SURESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 16 (i) to (iii):-

(2.) IN reply the respondents have taken the following stand vide paras 4, 6, 8, 12 and 13:-

(3.) ADMITTEDLY, the petitioner has since been appointed as TGT (Arts) in compliance of judgment dated 03.12.2009, Annexure P-17. However, according to him the direction in the said judgment dated 03.12.2009, was for giving appointment as TGT (Arts) "as per old criteria", but instead he has been appointed "purely on contract basis" instead of regular basis, as was the purport of the said judgment dated 03.12.2009. According to the petitioner, his case is covered on all fours under judgment dated 21.07.2011, passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP(T) No. 16230 of 2008, Madan Lal Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, which is stated to have since been implemented.