Himachal Pradesh High Court
Kuldip Singh And Ors vs State Of H.P. And Ors on 2 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 3628 of 2024
.
Decided on: 02.05.2024
Kuldip Singh and Ors. ....Petitioners.
Versus
State of H.P. and Ors. ...Respondents.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the petitioners : Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Leela Nand Sharma,
Additional Advocate General.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral)
Since, representation dated 03.03.2024
(Annexure P-3), having been filed by the petitioners to
the Director, Department of Elementary Education,
Himachal Pradesh, is not being decided, petitioners
are compelled to approach this Court in the instant
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, praying therein for following main relief:
.
a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may
kindly be issued directing the respondents to
fix the pay of the petitioners in the pay band of
Rs. 10,300-34,800+4400 grade Pay with
additional 3% promotional increment w.e.f.
01.10.2012, as has been done with the
incumbents promoted to the post of Head
Teacher after 01.10.2012, with all
consequential benefits and interest @ 9% per
annum, in view of the judgment dated
07.07.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by this
r Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 2500/2021 &
connected matter, titled as Ranjit Singh & Ors.
Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., when the respondents
vide orders dated 19.09.2023 &
21/22.09.2023 (Annexure P-2) have decided
to implement the same, in the interest of law
and justice."
2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioners, as
has been highlighted in the petition and further
canvassed by Ms. Sheetal Kaul, learned counsel for
the petitioners is that benefit of promotional
increment of Head Teacher is required to be given to
the petitioners in terms of judgment dated 7.7.2023,
passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP
No. 2500 of 2021 a/w connected matters, titled
Ranjit Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Himachal
Pradesh and Ors., but such benefit, despite there
.
being representation, is not being granted.
3. Ms. Sheetal Kaul, while making this Court
peruse copy of office order dated 19.9.2023 issued
under the signature of Director of Elementary
Education, states that pursuant to judgment passed
by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Ranjit
Singh (supra), similarly situate persons have been
already granted benefit of promotional increments to
the post of Head Teacher w.e.f. 1.10.2012, the date
from which the promotional increment has been
released to those Head Teachers who were promoted
as such, after 1.10.2012. She further states that since
aforesaid judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench
of this Court has attained finality, rather has been
given effect to, as is evident from the office order dated
19.9.2023 benefit of promotion, as prayed for in the
instant petition, is required to be given to the
petitioners.
4. While appearing and waiving notice on
behalf of the respondents-State, Mr. Leela Nand
.
Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, having
carefully perused the judgment passed in Ranjit
Singh supra vis-à-vis relief claimed in the instant
proceedings, fairly states that case of the petitioners is
also required to be considered and decided in light of
Ranjit Singh supra. In view of the fair stand adopted
by the learned Additional Advocate General, there
appears to be no justification to call reply from the
respondents.
5. Consequently, in view of the above, present
petition is disposed of with direction to the
respondent/Director of Elementary Education, to
consider and decide representations of the petitioners
dated 03.03.2024 (Annexure P-3) in light of Ranjit
Singh's case (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within
four weeks. In case, petitioners are found to be
similarly situate to the petitioners in the aforesaid
judgment, they would be extended similar benefits.
Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the
needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass
.
detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is also
reserved to the petitioners to approach appropriate
court of law at appropriate time, if they still remain
aggrieved.
6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if
r to
any, shall also stand disposed of.
(Satyen Vaidya)
2nd May, 2024 Judge
(sushma)
