Himachal Pradesh High Court
Mahesh Kumar vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation & ... on 8 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No. 10137 of 2023
Decided on: 08.01.2024
Mahesh Kumar
........Petitioner
.
Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Anr.
.......Respondents
Coram
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA, JUDGE
WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? Yes
of
For the petitioner : Mr. Devender K. Sharma,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Ms. Shrutika, Advocate, vice Mr.
rt Dheeraj K. Vashishat, Advocate.
Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)
Notice. Ms. Shrutika, Advocate, appears and
waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ
petition is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the
order(s) intended to be passed hereinafter.
3. The petitioner, having been retired from
Respondent-Corporation, has filed the instant writ petition,
seeking the following reliefs:-
"That respondents may kindly be directed to
release enhanced dearness relief and interim relief
with arrears alongwith interest @ 9% per annum in
favour of the petitioner within time bound manner
and not to stop of the Dearness relief in future and
be released in view of judgments passed in CWP
3278/2021 titled Baldev Chand versus HRTC
(annexure P-2) and CWP 6013 of 2023 titled as
Braham Dass versus HRTC (annexure P-3) in the
interest of justice and fair play."
.
4. The case of the petitioner is that, he joined the
services of Respondent-Corporation in the year 1988 and
retired from service on 01.04.2007. He further submits that
the post retirement though the Dearness Reliefs has been
of
enhanced under Rule 55A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, from
100% to 153% by the State Government, which has been
rt
adopted and made applicable to the employees of the
Corporation but the same has not been released till day.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance
on the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 3278 of
2021, titled as Baldev Chand versus Himachal Pradesh
Road Transport Corporation and another, decided on
08.07.2021, Annexure P-1, and the orders dated
05.08.2021 passed thereafter.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
placed reliance to the judgment passed by Coordinate Bench
of this Court in CWP No.6013 of 2023, titled as Braham
Dass versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation &
another alongwith connected matters, decided on
05.09.2023, Annexure P-2, whereby, the Coordinate Bench
of this Court had directed the respondents to pay the due
and admissible dearness relief to the petitioners in terms of
.
the Office Memorandum issued under Rule 55A of the
CCS(Pension) Rules. The operative part of the judgment
reads as under:-
"3. All these petitions have been filed, praying for a
of
direction to the respondents to release enhanced
dearness relief and interim relief with arrears
alongwith interest in favour for the petitioners.
rt 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners referred to
office memorandum dated 07.02.2015 (Annexure
P-1), whereunder dearness relief to Himachal
Pradesh Government Pensioner/Family Pensioners
was revised w.e.f. 01.07.2014. Reliance was also
placed upon office memorandum dated 07.03.2020,
issued by the Department of Finance Government
of Himachal Pradesh, further revising the dearness
relief of Himachal Pradesh Government
Pensioners/ Family Pensioners w.e.f. 01.07.2019.
5. It is not in dispute that office memorandums
dated 07.02.2015 and 07.03.2020 have been
adopted by the respondent-Corporation and
dearness relief in terms of these office
memorandums is admissible to the petitioners, but
the same ha snot been released to them.
In view of above, all these writ petitions
are disposed of by directing the
respondents/competent authority to pay due and
admissible dearness relief to the petitioners in
terms of above office memorandums within a
period of six weeks from today. It is, however, made
clear that in case due and admissible dearness
relief is not paid by the respondents to the
.
petitioners within the aforesaid period, then the
same shall be payable with interest @ 5% per
annum from the due date till its actual realization."
7. Per contra, Ms. Shrutika, learned vice
counsel for the Respondent-Corporation submits that
of
the benefit of Dearness Relief, in terms of Rule 55A and
the mandate of this Court, in case of Baldev Chand and
rt
Braham Dass (supra) and the factual aspects need to
be looked into/verified.
8. In the above background, the writ petition
is disposed of with the direction to the Respondent
No.1-Managing Director, Himachal Pradesh Road
Transport Corporation, to look into the matter, [claim
for Enhanced Dearness Relief] and to pass appropriate
orders, in the light of the judgment(s), in case of
Baldev Chand and Braham Dass (supra), within six
weeks from today.
9. 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.
.
In aforesaid terms, the writ petition as
well as the pending miscellaneous application(s), if
any, shall also stand disposed of, accordingly.
of
(Ranjan Sharma)
Judge
January 8, 2024
(himani) rt
