Himachal Pradesh High Court
Decided On: October 12 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ... on 12 October, 2023
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
CWPOA No. 5270 of 2019
Decided on: October 12, 2023
________________________________________________________
Anil Gautam ........... Petitioner
.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others .. Respondents
________________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Advocate.
For the respondents :
Mr. Anoop Rattan, Advocate General
with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal
Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma,
Additional Advocates General & Mr.
Ravi Chauhan & Ms. Sunaina,
Deputy Advocates General, for
respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
Mr. Avinash Jaryal, Advocate, for
respondent No.3.
Nemo for respondents Nos. 4 to 9.
________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):
By way of present petition, which was originally filed as an
Original Application before erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative
Tribunal, which on its abolition came to transferred to this court and re-
registered as CWPOA No. 5270 of 2019, petitioner has prayed for the
following main reliefs:
"(i) That service of the applicant may kindly be regularized from
back date since date when junior to the applicant have been
regularized w.e.f. 28-8-2000 & 28-10-2000 in the light of office
order dated 12 October 2009 Annexure P-8 under order no.
UD-H(A)-14/94-IV-13177-81 (Directorate of urban
development Himachal Pradesh , Dated Shimla-2) & vide
office order No.UD-B(15)-2/99 dated 8-11-2002 Annexure P-4.
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
& P-6 i.e. UD-B(15)-11/08 dated 2-7-2009 with consequential
benefit of seniority , pay fixation & arrears etc.
(ii) That respondents be directed to grant 9% interest for delayed
payment of arrears etc. since the day when the services of
junior to applicant have been regulated i.e. 28-10-2000.."
.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that the issue
raised in the instant petition has been decided by this Court in Harsh
Gupta v. Secretary Urban Development and others, CWP No. 3877
of 2011, decided on 15.9.2014, Umesh Kumar Sharma v. State of
H.P. && others, CWP No. 7889 of 2010, decided on 23.7.2015, which
has been further upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to
Appeal (C) No. 15921/2016 titled State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
v. Umesh Kumar Sharma and Ors., decided on 2.9.2016 and his client
shall be content and satisfied, in case a direction is issued to the
respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of
decisions supra, in a time bound manner.
3. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General is not
averse to the innocuous prayer made on behalf of the Petitioner.
4. Consequently, in view of above, present petition is disposed of
with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of
the petitioner in light of Harsh Gupta and Umesh Kumar Sharma
supra, within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority
concerned, while doing the needful in terms of this order, shall afford
opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a speaking order
thereafter. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate
proceedings in appropriate court of law, if he still remains aggrieved.
5. The petition stands disposed of in the afore terms, alongwith all
pending applications.
(Sandeep Sharma)
Judge
.
October 12, 2023
Vikrant
r to
