The State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr vs Tikkam Ram
2023 Latest Caselaw 1480 HP

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

                                                  LPA No. 131 of 2022




                                                                                 .
                                                  Decided on: 27.02.2023





    The State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr.                                    ...Appellants
                                         Versus





    Tikkam Ram                                                              ...Respondent

    Coram:
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.





    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting? 1 No.

    For the Appellants :                  Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with Mr. I.N. Mehta,
                                         Mr. Y. W. Chauhan, Sr. Addl. A.Gs., Mr. J. S.
                             r           Guleria, Dy. A.G. and Mr. Rajat Chauhan,

                                         Law Officer.

    For the Respondent : Nemo.

    Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)

Aggrieved by the judgment passed by the learned

Writ Court, the writ respondents have filed the instant appeal.

2. The writ petitioner joined services of the appellant

against the vacancy reserved for ex-servicemen and was

appointed as Deputy Commissioner, Excise and Taxation on

14.09.2011 on regular basis.

3. Since the active military service rendered by the

petitioner was not being counted for the purpose of pay fixation

from the date of his appointment in civil employment against the

post reserved for ex-servicemen, hence he was constrained to

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

file writ petition being CWP No. 5178 of 2021. The said petition

came to be allowed alongwith another writ petition being CWP

.

No. 5179 of 2021, titled as Dev Raj v. The State of Himachal

Pradesh & another, vide a common judgment dated

25.11.2021, however with a rider that the findings returned by

the learned Writ Court would be subject to a similar issue

pending before the learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA.

4.

Here it needs to be emphasized that the issue in

question, in fact, had already been decided by learned Division

Bench of this Court in a judgment authored by one of us (Justice

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.), in CWP No. 4654 of 2013, titled as

Avtar Singh Dyal v. H.P. State Electricity Board Ltd. and

connected matters, decided on 26.11.2014. However, it appears

that when the judgment in Avtar Singh Dyal's case was

followed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWPOA No.

231 of 2019, titled as Amar Nath and others v. State of

Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 15.07.2020, the

State preferred an appeal being LPA No. 34 of 2021, titled as

State of H.P. v. Amar Nath & others, to show that that matter

was still at large.

5. This, in fact, constrained the learned Writ Court to

make the impugned judgment subject to the outcome of LPA No.

34 of 2021, as would be evident from paras 4 and 5 of the

impugned judgment, which read as under:-

.

4. At this stage, learned Additional Advocate General submits that though the issue is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Amar Nath's case

(supra), but as per his instructions, an LPA has been preferred by the State against the said judgment, though operation of the said judgment has not been stayed by the Hon'ble Division Bench.

5. Be that as it may, these petitions are disposed of by holding that the findings returned by this Court in CWPOA No. 231 of 2019, titled as Sh. Amar Nath and others Vs.

State of H.P. and others, decided on 15.07.2020 shall

mutatis mutandis apply to these petitions also and all directions so issued by this Court in the said judgment shall be construed as having been issued in these

petitions also. However, it is clarified that these writ petitions shall also abide by the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench in the Letters Patent Appeal, which has

been preferred by the State against the judgment passed in Amar Nath's case (supra). Miscellaneous applications, if

any, also stand disposed of.

6. Now, even the LPA alongwith connected matters

stand decided by the learned Division Bench of this Court vide

judgment dated 09.05.2022, whereby the LPA preferred in Amar

Nath's case (supra) has been ordered to be dismissed, whereas

the connected writ petitions preferred by ex-servicemen have

been allowed, mainly on the ground that the issue is no more res

integra in terms of the judgment already rendered by this Court

in Avtar Singh Dyal's case (supra). Additionally, we find that

the appellants have not even chosen to assail the common

.

judgment rendered in Dev Raj's case (supra), which has

attained finality and, thus, the instant appeal would otherwise be

not maintainable.

7. Consequently, for the reasons stated above, we find

no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed,

leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

                                             (Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
                                                       Judge


                                                  (Virender Singh)
    27th February, 2023                                Judge
         (sanjeev)