IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH
CWP. NO.1575 /2021
In the matter of:-
Veena Devi
……..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Others
…….Respondents
INDEX
Sr. Particulars Page
No No
1. Rejoinder to the reply filed by the
respondent no.1 and 2. Alongwith
affidavit.
Dated this 30th Nov, 2021
Shimla Petitioner
Through Counsel
Arun Raj
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH
CWP. NO.1575 /2021
In the matter of:-
Veena Devi
……..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Others
…….Respondents
Rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondent no.1 and 2.
May it please Your Lordship’s
Reply to the preliminary submissions :
1. That contents of the corresponding para of the reply
are false and misleading, it is further humbly
submitted that the present petition is maintainable
as the petitioner’s fundamental right guaranteed
under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India
have been violated by the inaction on the part of the
respondents, whereby the petitioner’s services were
not absorbed into government service at par with
other similarly situated e-governance employees on
the basis of a Govt. policy decision (Annexure P-2
Colly), It is further humbly submitted that the
petitioner though initially was engaged as part time
sweeper on contract basis under e-Governance
Society, kangra at Dharamshala on dated
10.02.2002 and was performing her duties for 4 to
5 hours a days but from 01.01.2007, the
respondents started taking additional work of peon
from the petitioner and as such the petitioner’s
services were extended from 9:00Am to 06:00PM
i.e 9 hours a day i.e full time instead of part time
and from 01.01.2011 the petitioner’s services were
converted in to Peon/Sweeper on fixed monthly
remuneration @ 3520/ per month, which makes her
eligible at par with all other contractual employees
of the e-Governance Society, Dharmshala who
were absorbed into Government service in
accordance with the policy decision of the
government vide Annexure P-2 (Colly) dated
6.03.2017 & 26.04.2017. 9418150470
It is further humbly submitted that the only
objection which was pointed out for denial of
absorption of her services into Government
contract vide Annexure P-3 & P-4 was that she was
not eligible as at that time she was not possessing
Matriculation which is an essential criteria under
the R& P Rules for the post of Peon Class IV, but
after acquiring the essential educational
qualification of Matriculation in March, 2020
(Annexure P-5), and vide Annexure P-6 &P-7 her
case was sent through proper channel for
regularization of her services as per the
Government policy(Annexure P-2 Colly), and vide
impugned communication letter dated 15.10.2020
Annexure P-8, respondent no.1 denied absorption
and regularization of petitioner’s service stating
that there is no policy for such absorption, which is
totally baseless and false as there is policy of the
government vide Annexure P2 (Collectively) dated
6.03.2017 and 26.04.2017 , wherein all the e-
Governance employees working in the
establishment of Deputy Commissioners were
absorbed into government service. Therefore, the
impugned letter dated 15.10.2020 (Annexure P-8)
deserved to be quashed and set aside and the
present petitioner may kindly be allowed.
2. That the respondents in para 2 of the preliminary
submission have themselves admitted the case of
the petitioner that all the e-governance employees
were absorbed in the office establishment of
Deputy Commissioner Kangra at Dharmshala
except the petitioner as she was not fulfilling the
educational qualification as laid down in R & P
Rules for Class IV employees as she was holding
educational qualification of 5th pass and no other
reason was cited for rejection of her absorption
vide Annexure P-6 &P-7, but after acquiring the
matriculation certificate in March, 2020 rejection
of her claim for regularization at par with similarly
situated employees of e-governance society as per
Govt. policy (Annexure P_2 Colly) is illegal,
discriminatory, arbitrary and against the spirit of
article 14 of Constitution of India. Hence the
present petition may kindly be allowed for justice
and fair play.
3. That the contents of para 3 of the reply are admitted
being matter of record.
Rejoinder on Merits
1. That the contents of this para of the reply so far
as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the petition are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of
the petition are re-asserted and reiterated. It is
further submitted that rejection of claim of the
petitioner for absorption into govt service vide
impugned letter dated 15.10.2020 issued by
respondent no.1 after acquiring the educational
qualification of Matric in March, 2020 is illegal,
arbitrary and discriminatory as after acquiring
the essential educational qualification of Matric
the petitioner became eligible in all respect in
terms of R & P Rules for the Class IV employee
for absorption into government service as per the
govt. policy vide Annexure P-2 Colly. Hence,
the present petition deserves to be allowed in the
interest of justice.
2. to 11 That contents of corresponding para are
admitted by the respondents, hence need no
reply.
12. (A) That the contents of this para of the reply so
far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the petition are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
petition are re-asserted and reiterated.
(B). That the contents of this para of the reply so
far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the petition are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of
the petition are re-asserted and reiterated. It is
further humbly submitted that that rejection of
claim of the petitioner for absorption into govt
service vide impugned letter dated 15.10.2020
issued by respondent no.1 after acquiring the
educational qualification of Matric in March,
2020 is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory as
after acquiring the essential educational
qualification of Matric the petitioner became
eligible in all respect in terms of R & P Rules for
the Class IV employee for absorption into
government service as per the govt. policy vide
Annexure P-2 Colly. Hence, the present petition
deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice.
C. That the contents of this para of the reply so far
as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the petition are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of
the petition are re-asserted and reiterated.
D.-E That the contents of this para of the reply so
far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the petition are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of
the petition are re-asserted and reiterated.
13-14. That the contents of this para of the reply so
far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the petition are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of
the petition are re-asserted and reiterated.
That in view of the facts and
circumstances as discussed in the above
mentioned paras the present petition may kindly
be allowed and the relief sought by the
petitioner may kindly the granted in the interest
of justice and fair play.
Dated this 30th Nov, 2021
Shimla Petitioner
Through Counsel
Arun Raj
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH
CWP. NO.1575 /2021
In the matter of:-
Veena Devi
……..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Others
…….Respondents
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE REJOINDER
I, Veena Devi Widow of Late Sh. Chatar Singh,
Permanent resident of Village Sham Nagar PO
Dharmshala, District Kangra presently working as Peon at
E- Governance Center, Sub-Division, Dharamshala,
District Kangra H.P., aged about 47 years, do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare that this writ petition has been
drafted at my instance and under my instructions.
1 That the accompanying rejoinder has been prepared
and drafted at my instance and under my
instructions. The contents from paras 1 to 14 and
sub-paras the said petition are true and correct to the
best of my personal knowledge based on record no
part of it is false and nothing material has been
concealed there from.
2 That the deponent further declare that this affidavit
of mine is true and correct to the best of my
personal knowledge, no part of it is false and
nothing material has been concealed there from.
Verified at Shimla on this day of, 2021.
Deponent
