Santosh Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 22 April, 2026

    0
    30
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Himachal Pradesh High Court

    Santosh Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 22 April, 2026

    Author: Ajay Mohan Goel

    Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
                            SHIMLA
                                 CWP No. 5347 of 2026 a/w
                                CWP No.5556 of 2026
                                 Decided on 22nd April 2026
    
    
    
    
                                                              .
        CWP No.5347 of 2026
    
    
    
    
    
        Santosh Kumar                           ...Petitioner
    
                                    Versus
    
    
    
    
    
        State of Himachal Pradesh and others
                                                         ...Respondents
    
    
    
    
                                     of
        CWP No.5556 of 2026
        Sardar Singh                                            ...Petitioner
    
                      rt            Versus
    
        State of Himachal Pradesh and others
    
                                                             ...Respondents
        Coram
    
        Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
    

    1

    Whether approved for reporting?

    SPONSORED

    For the petitioner(s): Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate,

    for the petitioners(s) in both the
    petitions.

    For the respondents : Mr. Rahul Thakur, Deputy
    Advocate General, for the
    respondents, in both the

    petitions.

    Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
    As common issues of facts and law are involved in

    these petitions, therefore, the same are being disposed of vide

    common judgment.

    ::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:20:51 :::CIS
    2

    2. The petitioners herein are praying for issuance of a

    direction to the respondents to promote them from the post of

    Sub-Inspector to the post of Inspector, in terms of the contents

    .

    of the writ petitions and prayers made therein. Petitioners are to

    superannuate on 30.04.2026.

    3. Learned Deputy Advocate General has handed

    over instructions received in both the matters and in terms of

    of
    these instructions, the Court stands apprised that in light of an

    order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in
    rt
    CWP No.4358 of 2026, titled Rakesh Kumar and others versus

    State of Himachal Pradesh and others, the final inter se

    seniority could not be finalized and DPC w.e.f. 2010 to 2024

    could not be reviewed. The instructions read as under:-

    “(i) It is submitted that the Govt. of Himachal
    Pradesh Vide their letter dated 12-05-2023

    (Annexure-R-1) in consultation with Law
    Department which in turn has opined as under:-

    “That R&P Rules were framed and notified
    by involving the Statutory Powers by sub
    section (3) of Section 17 read with Section
    141
    of the Himachal Pradesh Police Act
    2007 (Act No. 17 of 2007) whereby the
    Standing Order No. 1 of 1999 P-1 (5) Com
    (SCRB)/93-02-10454-55 dated 22-07-2002
    and the provisions of Punjab Police Rules

    ::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:20:51 :::CIS
    3

    1934 in application to the State of Himachal
    Pradesh were repealed by the Provisions of
    R&P Rules once repealed by the statutory
    notification cannot be restored by an
    executive decision/order. Moreover, the
    Himachal Pradesh Act has come into force in

    .

    the year 2007 and the rules may be framed

    only under the provision of Act ibid.”

    (ii) It is further submitted that R&P Rules 2010

    has been published /notified in e-Gazette on 28-06-
    2010 and also in compliance of the Judgment as

    of
    passed by the Hon’ble High Court of H.P in CWP
    No. 6599/2010 dated 27-04-2012 that the
    integration postulates equation of posts and also
    rt
    resulting to restructuring of different wings of the

    wireless organization into a single cadre w.e.f 28-
    06-2010 and also aspect that it not in dispute that
    Rules in respect of Directorate of Police C&TS were

    promulgated only on 28-06-2010 and the birth of
    C&TS has taken effect on 28-06-2010. As such

    petitioner was fully aware about his right and he has
    not challenged the above mentioned judgment

    before the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh,

    therefore judgment has attained finality at this
    stage.

    (iii) That the R&P Rules 2010 are being strictly
    followed and the promotions held at the level of Sub
    Inspector and Inspectors level were made in
    accordance with the Standing Order No. 1/1999 as

    ::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:20:51 :::CIS
    4

    per the precedents and approval of the competent
    authority w.e.f 2010 to 2024. Further to resolve all
    pending seniority and litigation issues within the
    Communication & Technical Services (C&TS) a

    .

    committee met on 08-08-2025 and 12-08-2025. A
    request was made on 14-10-2025 (Annexure-R-2)

    with the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh for ex-post
    facto approval regularization of Promotion of C&TS
    officials which were carried out w.e.f 2010 to 2024

    of
    beyond the sanctioned strength of R&P Rules 2010.
    The DPC w.e.f 2010 to 2024 are required to be
    rt
    reviewed in compliance to the judgment dated 27-
    04-2012 and R&P Rules 2010. It is further

    submitted that the Govt. of H.P vide letter dated 02-
    12-2025 (Annexure-R-3) has intimated that

    proposal regarding Ex-Post facto
    regularization/approval of induction of 147
    Constables and Ex-Post facto approval of

    promotion of personnel from 2010 to 22.07.2024 in

    C&TS has been examined and found inconsistent
    with the existing R&P Rules, 2010. It is further

    submitted that in reference to 02-12-2025 of H.P
    Govt. letter the matter has again been taken up with
    the Govt. of H.P vide D.O No. 218 dated 05-01-
    2026 (Annexure-R-4).

    ::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:20:51 :::CIS
    5

    (iv) It is pertinent to mention here that the
    Integrated tentative Seniority list as it stood on 28-
    06-2010 of C&TS Officials (Constable to Inspector)
    were issued vide PHQ office memorandum dated

    .

    21-11-2025 and in compliance to the judgment
    passed by the Hon’ble High Court of H.P ON 27-04-

    2012 in CWP No. 6599/2010 titled as Sita Ram Vs
    State of H.P
    alongwith connected matters & in
    implementation of R&P Rules, 2010. The process of

    of
    revision of seniority list initiated vide office
    memorandum dated 21-11-2025 has been
    rt
    challenged by the C&TS Official by filing an CWP
    No. 4358 of 2026 titled as Rakesh Kumar Vs State

    of H.P in which the Hon’ble High Court of H.P has
    passed the following order in the meantime, the

    execution, implementation and operation of
    impugned order dated 20-01-2026 (Annexure P-35)
    shall be kept in abeyance.” Because of this the final

    inter-se-Seniority could not be finalized or DPC’s

    w.e.f 2010 to 2024 could not be reviewed at this
    stage Keeping in view of present situation the DPC

    of the petitioner at this stage could not be convened
    for the promotion to the rank of Inspector as
    Integration process has been kept in abeyance by
    the Hon’ble High Court of H.P in CWP No. 4358 of
    2026.”

    ::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:20:51 :::CIS
    6

    4. In the backdrop of the above instructions, learned

    counsel for the petitioners submits that as both the petitioners

    are to superannuate on 30.04.2026 and as they have already

    .

    approached the Court before the date of their superannuation,

    these petitions be disposed of with the direction that after the

    adjudication by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the above

    referred matter, based on the said adjudications, let needful be

    of
    done qua consideration of petitioners for promotion against the

    post of Inspector and respondents be directed not to ignore
    rt
    them in the DPC on the ground that they stand superannuated

    in the interregnum.

    5. As the petitioners are already before the Court

    before their superannuation, seeking promotion to the post of

    Inspector and as the Department has expressed its

    helplessness at this stage to proceed with the matter in the light

    of the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in CWP

    No.4358 of 2026, titled Rakesh Kumar and others versus State

    of Himachal Pradesh and others, as prayed for, this petition is

    disposed of with the direction that after the adjudication of the

    aforesaid matter by the Hon’ble Division Bench and in terms of

    ::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:20:51 :::CIS
    7

    the judgment that may be passed by the Hon’ble Division

    Bench, the cases of the petitioners be considered for promotion

    to the posts of Inspector from due date and the factum of their

    .

    having superannuated, shall not weigh with the respondents

    while taking a call in this regard, in the light of the fact that the

    petitioners had approached this Court before their

    superannuation.

    of

    6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also

    stand disposed of.

    rt
    (Ajay Mohan Goel)

    Judge
    April 22, 2026
    (Vinod)

    ::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:20:51 :::CIS



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here