Santosh Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 13359 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.6303 of 2023 Date of Decision: 12.9.2023

.

_______________________________________________________

Santosh Kumar .......Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh & others ... Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1

For the Petitioner:

For the Respondents:

r to Ms. Ambika Kotwal, Advocate.

Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy

Advocate General.

___________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):

By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for

following main relief:-

"(i) That the Annexure P-6 office order/communication dated 20.01.2023 may kindly be quashed and set

aside, being illegal, arbitrary and palpably wrong since, based on the wrong/incorrect provisions of the law/rules, as the case of the petitioner is

covered under Punjab Police Rules.

(ii) That the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to decide Annexure P-7 dated 6.3.2023 in light of Punjab Police Rules, particularly rule 12.25 and to consider the case of the petitioner for

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

re-enrolment/re-instatement on the same rank (Head Constable).

(iii) That the respondent authorities may be directed to re-enrol/re-instate the petitioner at the same

.

rank and also grant him notional benefits within

time bond period.

2. Before the case at hand could be heard and decided on

its own merits, learned counsel representing the petitioner states that

petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued

to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in

light of judgment dated 6th July 2023, passed by Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court in CWP No.5993 of 2019, titled Prem Lal Rao vs. State of

H.P. and others, in a time bound manner. Learned Additional

Advocate General representing the respondents is not averse to

aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

3. Having perused the averments contained in the petition

as well as relief prayed therein vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied

upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the instant petition

already stands adjudicated by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

CWP No.5993 of 2019 and as such, no prejudice, if any, would be

caused to either of the parties, if the respondents are directed to

consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment

supra.

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

is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.2 to consider and

decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 6th July,

.

2023 passed in Prem Lal Rao's case (supra), expeditiously,

preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority

concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order shall

afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass

detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the

petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if

he still remains aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stands

disposed of.

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 12,2023

(shankar)