Rajesh Kumar & Others vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1294 HP

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                     CWP No. 4551 of 2020
                                      Date of decision: 25.02.2021




                                                                           .

    Rajesh Kumar & Others                                              ....Petitioners
                                           Versus
    State of Himachal Pradesh & another                              ....Respondents





    Coram
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, J.

Whether approved for reporting ?1 ___________________________________________________________

For the Petitioners: Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Advocate.

    For the Respondents:             M/s Sumesh Raj, Sanjeev Sood and
                                     Dinesh Thakur, Additional Advocate
                        r            Generals with Ms. Divya Sood, Deputy
                                     Advocate General.

    Sandeep Sharma, Judge(Oral):

Notice. Mr. Dinesh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate

General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of

respondents.

2. By way of present petition, the petitioners have prayed

for following substantive relief:-

"That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to grant the petitioners the benefit of

approved military service towards fixation of pay as from the date of the joining of civil employment alongwith all consequential benefits with up to date interest as same similar and benefit granted by this Court in the judgment dated 15.07.2020 passed by this Court in CWPOA No. 231 of 2019, titled as Sh. Amar Nath and Others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others (Annexure P-7)."

3. Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, learned counsel representing the

petitioners states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case, the

case of the petitioner is considered and decided in terms of judgment dated

1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement?

15.07.2020 passed by this Court in CWPOA No. 231 of 2019, titled as Sh.

Amar Nath and Others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others (Annexure

.

P-7).

4. Mr. Sumesh Raj, learned Additional Advocate General is not

opposed the aforesaid prayer made by the petitioners and as such, this

Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer having been made

on behalf of the petitioners.

5. Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with

the direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of

the petitioners in terms of aforesaid judgment passed by Coordinate

Bench of this Court within a period of four weeks. In case, petitioners

are found to be similar situate, consequential benefits, in terms of

aforesaid judgment, be also released expeditiously in favour of the

petitioners. Needless to say that authorities while considering and

deciding the case of the petitioners in the light of the aforesaid

judgment, shall afford them opportunity of being heard, if they desire

and would also pass speaking order.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge

25th February, 2021 (reena)/ Sushma