IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 2235 of 2011 Date of Decision: 27.8.2011. Kanta Thakur petitioner Versus State of HP & others. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant : Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.M Bisht, Dy. A.G with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Dy. A.G for respondents. Justice Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “ a. To direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as Steno (Jr. Stenographer) with effect from 31-10-2005, when petitioner has completed 8 years of service on daily wage basis with all consequential benefits. b. To award the costs of this writ petition in favour of the petitioner;” 2. In the reply, the respondents have inter-alia taken the following stand: “1. That as per record available the petitioner was initially appointed as Steno Typist on daily wages for a Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 period of one year by DIET, Shimla on 29.10.1997 with the prior approval where she joined on 31.10.1997 and thereafter her services had been extended for year to year basis up till now. However it is further submitted that the matter with regard to her regularization alongwith other similarly situated cases had been taken up with the Govt. At present R&P Rules of Steno Typist in DIETs are not in existence. The case of the petitioner for regularization of her service is under consideration with the Govt. But the same is still pending as the R&P Rules have not finalized yet. However, the proposal for adopting of R&P Rules of Steno-Typist Elementary Education Department for Steno Typist of DIET was sent to Department personnel for approval and the Department of personal has advised as under:- “The process for framing the common direction R&P Rules for the post of Steno Typist is under consideration with the Govt. These rules will be applicable to all the Govt. Department. Therefore the A/D is advised to pend this proposal for the time being”. It is further submitted that the process for framing of R&P Rules and considering the petitioner for regularization as per R&P Rules is likely to take some more time. 2. That the petitioner had earlier filed CWP 4994/10 titled as Kanta Thakur which was disposed of by the Hon’ble High Court on 25.8.2010 with the directions to the first respondent to take final decision in the matter within a period of four months from the date of production of copy of the judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. In compliance to the directions of the Hon’ble Court the petitioner was called for personal hearing on 4.3.2011 and the matter was 3 decided as under” At present R&P Rules of Steno Typist in DIETs are not in existence. The case of the petitioner for regularization of her service is under consideration with the Govt. but the same is still pending as the R&P Rules have not finalized yet. However, the proposal for adopting of R&P Rules of Steno-Typist Elementary Education Department for Steno Typist of DIET was sent to Department personnel for approval and the Department of personal has advised as under:-“ The process for framing the common direct R&P Rules for the post of Steno Typist is under consideration with the Govt. These rules will be applicable to all the Govt. Department. Therefore the A/D is advised to pend this proposal for the time being.” It is further submitted that the process for framing of R&P Rules and considering the petitioner for regularization as per R&P Rules is likely to take some more time. As such due to the above facts and circumstances the services of the petitioner could not be regularized without framing the R&P Rules for the post of Steno-Typist. Hence, the present Civil writ petitioner filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed.” 3. In view of specific stand now taken direction is issued to the respondents to positively frame the rules within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment and consider the petitioner’s case for regularization in accordance with the regularization policy of the State. While doing so respondents shall also take into account the earlier decision dated 4 23.12.2010 (Annexure P-5) taken with respect to the teachers working on contract basis with the other DIETS in the State. With the aforesaid observations, present petition is disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. August 27, 2011 (Priti)