IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 4189 of 2008. Decided on: October 28, 2010. Gaitri Devi …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner: Ms. Ranjana Parmar, , Amicus-curiae. For the Respondents: Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. for respondents No. 1 and 2. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers: “(a) To direct the respondents No. 1 & 2 to take over the services of the applicant as Clerk w.e.f. 1.4.95 as she was working in govt. aided Janta High School at the time of taking over the school. 2. In the reply, it is stated as follows:- “ii) That the Government vide its notification No. Shiksha-II-Chh(5) 14/92 Dated 14.9.1992 has upgraded Government Middle School Urla to High Standard and has not taken over the privately managed Janta High School Urla. iii) that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 6211-6212 of 1997 (arising out of S.L.P.(C) Nos. 21412-21413 of 1996) State of Himachal Pradesh & others versus Harvinder Singh & others has held that the High Court has committed an error in taking the view that the respondents were earlier employed in privately Middle School which were upgraded and taken over by the State Government. The apex Court further held that the respondents have not been able to show any orders of the State Government regarding taking over the Private Institution by the Government and it appears that the Government High School, Urla and Jahu are distinct 2 and separate from the private schools in which the respondents were employed. The judgment of the High Court was accordingly set aside and the Writ Petition filed by the respondents before the High Court was also dismissed. The order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India is annexed as Annexure-RA.” 3. In case the petitioner has still any surviving grievance left with regard to the factual and legal position, as above, it will be open to her to pursue the same before the first respondent, in which case, the first respondent will consider the matter and appropriate action, with notice to the petitioner, will be taken within another four months. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. October 28, 2010. ( Justice V.K. Sharma ), (karan/vs) Judge.