Decided On 24Th July vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Decided On 24Th July vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 24 July, 2024

Author: Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

                                                           2024:HHC:5754


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
                                         CWP No. 7170 of 2024
                                         Decided on 24th July, 2024
    Rajesh Rani and others
                                                               ...Petitioners




                                                            .
                               Versus





    State of Himachal Pradesh and others
                                                               Respondents
    Coram





    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
    1
    Whether approved for reporting?
    For the petitioners:     Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate.

    For the respondents:
                  r           to
                             Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with
                             Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional
                             Advocate General.

    Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

Issue notice. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of respondents.

2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-

"That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent department to grant all service benefits to the petitioner being regular employees w.e.f. the initial date(s) of joining in the department as contractual appointees and also to count the said period for their seniority for sake of retiral benefits and pensionary benefits in view of ::: Downloaded on - 24/07/2024 20:31:45 :::CIS 2 the judgment dated 03.08.2023 passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 2004/2017, titled as Taj Mohammad and others vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and others (Annexure P-1)."

.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that interest of justice would be served, in case, the representations that have been made by the petitioners are ordered to be decided by the Authority within some reasonable time, taking into consideration the judgment being relied upon by the petitioners.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General informs the Court that a Review Petition is pending in one of the matter, which was decided jointly by the Hon'ble Division Bench along with Taj Mohammad case and appropriate call on the representations of the petitioners shall be taken after the adjudication of the said Review Petition.

5. In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of with the direction that after the adjudication of the said Review Petition, the representations of the petitioners be decided within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) .

                                                Judge





    July 24, 2024
        (Vinod)





                 r         to









                                         ::: Downloaded on - 24/07/2024 20:31:45 :::CIS