eCourtsIndia

Santosh Damakta vs. State

Final Order
Court:High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Judge:Hon'ble Honourable The Chief Justice A.M. Khanwilkar
Case Status:Dismissed
Order Date:11 Jun 2012
CNR:HPHC010066092012

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Before:

Hon'ble Honourable The Chief Justice A.M. Khanwilkar , Honourable Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary

Listed On:

11 Jun 2012

Order Text

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMP (M) No.845 of 2012 in LPA No. 226/2012

Decided on: June 11, 2012

Santosh Damak wife of Shri Joginder Singh, resident of village Pronthi, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P.

_____________________________________________________

.......Appellant.

Versus

    1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Principal Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2.
    1. District Education Officer, District Shimla at Shimla, H.P.
    1. Govt. Senior Secondary School Sarot through its Principal, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P.
    1. Parent Teacher Association, Government Senior Secondary School, Sarot through its President, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P.

....Respondents.

Coram:

Hon'ble The Chief Justice Kurian Joseph Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary

_________________________________________________________

For the Appellant:Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate.
For the Respondents:For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with<br>Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate<br>General for respondents No.1 to 3.<br>

Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice (Oral):

This is a petition for condonation of delay of 1 year and 11 months. On going through the record, we do not find any satisfactory reason at all for condoning the delay, since the same is not properly explained.

  1. On merits also, we find that the petitioner does not have a case as against the State. Admittedly, the post claimed by the petitioner i.e. PTA Sanskrit, in Senior Secondary was not sanctioned and was not advertised. Therefore, the Learned Single Judge is perfectly justified in dismissing the writ petition. Petitioner claims that she had actually been appointed by the PTA and she had worked in the School. If that be so, it will be open to her to claim the benefits from the PTA.

  2. Subject to the above, both the petition and the appeal are dismissed.

(Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice.

(Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary), June 11, 2012 Judge.

(ss/ps)

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order