SUNIL PRASHAR(Not Applicable) vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) — CWP/3632/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010128052026

Filing Number

CWP/10988/2026

Filing Date

16-Mar-2026

Registration No

CWP/3632/2026

Registration Date

23-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 13-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUNIL PRASHAR(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Chander Narayan Singh,Nidhi Singh,Nidhi Singh, ,Nidhi Singh

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)

    Adv. ,Susheel Gautam,AG 1123

  2. 2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HoFF),(Not Applicable)

  3. 3.3. The Himachal Pradesh Natural Resources Management Society (HPNRMS)(Not Applicable)

  4. 4.Integrated Development Project(IDP), Through Chief Project. Director,(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF

    The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed Sunil Prashar's petition for regularization of his contractual services as a Data Entry Operator, directing the State to apply the same benefits granted in the Sant Ram case since the Supreme Court had finalized that decision. The court rejected the State's argument that the petitioner's case differed from Sant Ram's, ordering contractual regularization from due date with notional and actual benefits retroactively accruing three years prior, to be completed within three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Office Objection

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/3632/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed Sunil Prashar's petition for regularization of his contractual services as a Data Entry Operator, directing the State to apply the same benefits granted in the Sant Ram case since the Supreme Court had finalized that decision. The court rejected the State's argument that the petitioner's case differed from Sant Ram's, ordering contractual regularization from due date with notional and actual benefits retroactively accruing three years prior, to be completed within three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case