1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. No. 1514 of 2009 Decided on 23rd November, 2010. Kuldeep Singh. ….Petitioner Versus State of HP & ors …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Mankotia, vice counsel. For Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 4. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: (i) That a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order or direction quashing the notification dated 27.5.2008 with all consequential effects may be issued or passed. (ii) Writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order or direction quashing the order dated 3.3.2009 may be issued or passed. (iii) Writ of Certiorari or other appropriate writ or order or direction quashing the Inquiry report dated 24.9.2008 may be issued or passed. 2. In view of the recent instruction issued by the Director, Higher Education, Himahal Pradesh vide communication dated 24th September, 2009, the case requires fresh consideration in the light of the said communication. The relevant portion of the communication of the Director, Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh reads as follows: 2 “Refer to letter No. EDN-Kha(7)3706-1 dated 3.9.2009 from the Principal Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh addressed to this directorate and copy endorsed to you and others vide which the government has asked to move an application immediate before the chairman of the concerned enquiry committee in view of the decision of CWP No. 525/2009 titled as Ravinder Singh Vs. State and CWP No. 2632/2009 titled as Koyal Kumar Vs. State wherein the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh while setting aside the orders of the committee has directed that Committee after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the other respondents can look into the matter and decide whether the appointment of the petitioner was valid or not. The committee while deciding the issue will keep into consideration of observation of the Hon’ble High Court made in CWPs. The copy of the judgment/orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court in CWP No. 2632/2009 titled as Koyal Kumar Vs. State is also being sent to all the Deputy Directors. Therefore, you are directed to comply with the directions of the Government and take action in the matter accordingly.” 3. In view of the above clarification issued by the Director of Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. However, we make it clear that it will be open to the Enquiry Committee to consider the matter afresh in the light of the instruction referred to above. The needful, if required, shall be done expeditiously from the date of the production of a copy of this judgment by either side. It is also made clear that in the cases of those teachers who are working in the schools, in case they have not been paid their due wages, the same shall be paid and the State shall ensure that the 3 required grant-in-aid is given to the Schools, as per the Rules forthwith. In case the vacancy still exists, we make it clear that it will be open to the respondents to re-engage the petitioner, subject to the outcome of the inquiry and in case, the petitioner is thus re-engaged, he shall be paid the eligible benefits during the period of service. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. November 23rd, 2010. (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (hl/kck) Judge.