Decided On: 04.11.2023 vs State Of H.P. & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 17512 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 8417 of 2023 Decided on: 04.11.2023 Tej Singh Thakur & Ors ........Petitioners Versus

.

State of H.P. & Ors .......Respondents Coram

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA, JUDGE

WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING?

For the petitioner : Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate.

    For the respondents        : Mr.   B.C.  Verma,     Additional
                                 Advocate General for respondents
                   r             No.1 to 5.

    Ranjan Sharma, (Oral)

                 Since       representation       dated          15.10.2023

(Annexure P-3), having been filed by the petitioners to the

Director, Department of Elementary Education, Himachal

Pradesh, is not being decided, petitioners are compelled to

approach this Court in the instant proceedings filed under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein for

following main relief:

(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioners in the pay band of Rs. 10,300-34,800+4400 grade pay with additional 3% promotional increment w.e.f. 01.10.2012, as has been done with the incumbents promoted to the post of Head

Teacher after 01.10.2012, with all consequential benefits and interest @ 9% per annum, in view of the judgment dated 07.07.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by this

.

Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 2500/2021 &

connected matter, titled as Ranjit Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors., when the

respondents vide orders dated 19.09.2023 & 21/22.09.2023 (Annexure P-2) have decided to implement the same, in the interest of law and justice.

(ii) That a writ in nature of mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation Annexure P-3,

dated 15.10.2023 during the pendency of the

writ petition, in the interest of law and justice.

2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioners, as has been

highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Naresh

Kaul, learned counsel for the petitioners is that benefit of

promotional increment of Head Teacher is required to be given

to the petitioners in terms of judgment dated 7.7.2023, passed

by the coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2500 of

2021 a/w connected matters, titled Ranjit Singh and Ors v.

State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., but such benefit,

despite there being representations, is not being granted.

3. Mr. Naresh Kaul, while making this Court peruse

copy of office order dated 19.9.2023 issued under the signature

of Director of Elementary Education, states that pursuant to

.

judgment passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in

Ranjit Singh (supra), similarly situate persons have been

already granted benefit of promotional increments to the post of

Head Teacher w.e.f. 1.10.2012/the date from which the

promotional increment has been released to those Head

Teachers who were promoted as such, after 1.10.2012. He

further states that since aforesaid judgment passed by the

coordinate Bench of this Court has attained finality, rather has

been given effect to, as is evident from the office order dated

19.9.2023 benefit of promotion, as prayed for in the instant

petition, is required to be given to the petitioners.

4. While appearing and waiving notice on behalf of the

respondents-State, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional

Advocate General having carefully perused the judgment passed

in Ranjit Singh supra vis-à-vis relief claimed in the instant

proceedings, fairly states that case of the petitioners is also

required to be considered and decided in light of Ranjit Singh

supra. In view of the fair stand adopted by the learned

Additional Advocate General, there appears to be no justification

to call reply from the respondents.

5. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition

is disposed of with direction to the respondent/Director of

Elementary Education, to consider and decide representations

.

of the petitioners dated 15.10.2023 (Annexure P-3) in light of

Ranjit Singh's case (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within

four weeks. In case, petitioners are found to be similarly situate

to the petitioners in the aforesaid judgment, they would be

extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned

while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford

an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass detailed

speaking order thereupon. Liberty is also reserved to the

petitioners to approach appropriate court of law at appropriate

time, if they still remain aggrieved. All pending applications

stand disposed of.

(Ranjan Sharma)

Judge November 4, 2023

(himani)