Himachal Pradesh High Court
Jaswant Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 4 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
AT SHIMLA
CWP No.165 of 2024
Decided on: 4th January, 2024
.
__________________________________________________________
Jaswant Singh .......Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others ......Respondents
____________________________________________________________
Coram
of
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge
1 Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner:
rt Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate
General, for respondents No.1 and 2-
State.
Mr. Anil Kumar God, Advocate, for
respondent No.3.
Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)
Notice. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy
Advocate General and Mr. Anil Kumar God, learned Standing
Counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of
respondents No.1 & 2 and respondent No.3, respectively.
2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ
petition is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
peculiar facts as borne out from the pleadings.
3. The petitioner, having retired from the post of
Jamadar on 31.01.2020 from the Office of Executive Officer,
.
Municipal Council, Hamirpur, has filed the instant writ
petition, with the following prayer:-
"That the writ in the nature of mandamus or other
writ, order or direction, directing the respondent
to pay arrear of pay as per revision of pay scale
of
w.e.f. 01.01.2016 with interest @ 6% per annum
from the due date till the date of its realization
rt and they shall also revise the pension, gratuity
and leave encashment and pay the same along
with interest @6% per annum till the date of
realizations."
4. Case of the petitioner is that the respondents-
State issued the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised)
Pay Rules, 2022, as per Notification dated 3rd January, 2022,
Annexure P-I, revising the pay scales of employees w.e.f.
01.01.2016; and as per Notification dated 25.02.2022 the
Respondents decided to give retiral benefits to its pensioners
w.e.f. 01.01.2016 onwards.
5. Learned counsel further submits that firstly,
respondents have not released the arrears of pay for the
period w.e.f. 01.01.2016 to 31.01.2020 as yet; secondly, as
per Notification dated 25.02.2022, the respondents have not
released the Revised Benefits i.e. Revised Leave Encashment,
.
Revised Commuted Pension, Retiral Benefits and Revised
Pension for the period w.e.f. 01.01.2021 to the petitioner till
day; and thirdly, the petitioner is entitled for interest @ 6% or
such other rate of interest on delayed payment of aforesaid
of
claims-dues-benefits from due date till realization.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed
reliance, on
rt the judgment passed by this Court, in
CWP No.5651 of 2023, tilted as Dr. Sunil Kumar Chandel
and others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others,
decided on 26.09.2023, CWP No.7895 of 2023, titled as
Krishan Lal & others Versus State of H.P. & others,
decided on 18.10.2023. He also placed reliance on the
judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in
CWP No.7359 of 2021, titled as Amita Gupta Versus State
of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 01.12.2022,
granting the revised leave encashment on the basis of revised
pay. He further submits that the judgment in case of Amita
Gupta (supra) stands implemented and in CWP No.2108 of
2023 titled as Bhagat Ram Versus Himachal Road
Transport Corporation and others, decided on 31.05.2023,
Annexure P-2, whereby this Court has mandated the
.
respondents therein to release the arrears of pay as well as
revised retiral benefits along with arrears with interest @ 6%
per annum from the due date till its realization.
7. On the other hand, Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned
of
Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Anil Kumar God, learned
Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents submit that
rt
the judgment in case of Bhagat Ram (supra) has not attained
finality, as the HRTC-Respondent therein has filed a Review
Petition, which is pending listing/hearing.
8. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the
petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner shall
be satisfied, in case, this Court permits him to make a
representation for claiming above benefits. The prayer being
innocuous, is not opposed and needs to be granted.
9. Accordingly, as prayed for, by the learned counsel
for the petitioner, this Court permits the petitioner to
make a representation, to respondent No.2-Director, Urban
Development, Himachal Pradesh, within three weeks from
today,; with further directions to the aforesaid respondent
to examine/consider the matter and to pass appropriate
orders, in accordance with law, within four weeks thereafter.
.
Ordered accordingly.
10. Needless to say that, this Court has not adverted
to the merits of the matter and all questions of facts and law
are left open.
of
In the aforesaid terms, the instant writ petition
as well as the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any,
rt
shall also stand disposed of.
(Ranjan Sharma)
Judge
January 04, 2024
(Bhardwaj)
