Decided On: 4Th August vs Hoshiar Singh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3513 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.253 of 2017 Decided on: 4th August, 2021 ______________________________________________________ State of H.P. and others .....Petitioners

.

                                        Versus

    Hoshiar Singh                             .....Respondent

_______________________________________________________

Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Whether approved for reporting?

______________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Ms. Ritta r Goswami & Mr. Vikas Rathore, Additional Advocates General and Ms. Seema

Sharma, Deputy Advocate General.

For the respondent: Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Advocate.

(Through Video Conferencing)

Ravi Malimath, Acting Chief Justice (Oral)

Aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.2015, passed by

the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA

No.159 of 2015, titled Hoshiar Singh Versus State of HP and others,

the State has filed this petition.

2. The respondent herein sought for regularization of his

services w.e.f. 01.01.2010 and not from the date of regularization

granted to him on 15.01.2013.

______________________________________________________ Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

3. On considering the contentions of both parties, the

Tribunal in terms of the impugned order held at para 6 as follows:-

"6. Accordingly, the original application is allowed and the respondents are directed to consider case of the applicant

.

for regularization on completion of 8 years service with all

consequential benefits within a period of two months."

4. Aggrieved by the said order, the State has filed this

petition.

5. On considering the contentions and the reasons

assigned, we do not find any ground to entertain this petition. The

Tribunal has only directed consideration of the case of the applicant

(respondent herein) for regularization. Whether he is entitled for

regularization or not, is to be determined by the State in terms of the

order of the Tribunal.

6. Therefore, it cannot be said that the State is aggrieved

by such an order. Consequently, the petition is disposed off. The

direction given in the impugned order shall be complied with by the

State within a period of three months from today.

                                                       ( Ravi Malimath )
                                                     Acting Chief Justice



                                                    ( Jyotsna Rewal Dua )
    August 04, 2021                                         Judge
     Bhardwaj/Mukesh