Decided On: 31.07.2024 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 10755 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Decided On: 31.07.2024 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Another on 31 July, 2024

Author: Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

                                           2024:HHC:6123
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                     CWP No.    7419 of 2024
                                                     Decided on: 31.07.2024




                                                                          .
    Ranjna Devi                                                            ... Petitioner





                       Versus
    State of Himachal Pradesh & another                ... Respondents
    Coram





    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1
    _____________________________________________________
    For the petitioner      :     Ms. Rajni Gandhi, Advocate.
    For the respondents             :        Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional





                                             Advocate General.
    Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate

General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have, inter

alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-

"a) That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ of mandamus whereby, the respondents may kindly

be directed to count the period of contractual service

rendered by the petitioner for the purpose of seniority, pay, allowances, leave encashment, promotion, pension

and other consequential benefits etc. in light of judgment passed in Taj Mohammad case as well as in Civil Writ Petition No.5043 of 2022 titled as Sunita Sangroli Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh.

b. That the respondents herein may kindly be directed to release the entire consequential monetary benefits accrued in favour of petitioner since, from the day of initial appointment of the petitioners on contractual basis

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

2024:HHC:6123

along with interest @ 12% per annum, appointment of the petitioners on contractual basis along with interest @ 12% per annum."

.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that interest

of justice would be served, in case, the representation made by the

petitioner is ordered to be decided by the Authority concerned within

some reasonable time, taking into consideration the judgment being

relied upon by the petitioner.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General informs the Court

that a Review Petition is pending in one of the matter, which was

decided jointly by the Hon'ble Division Bench along with Taj

Mohammad case and appropriate call on the representation of the

petitioner shall be taken after the adjudication of the said Review

Petition.

5. In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of

with the direction that after the adjudication of the said Review

Petition, the representation of the petitioner be decided within a

period of eight weeks thereafter.

6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also

stand disposed of.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 31, 2024 (Rishi)