Sumna Devi & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 16585 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sumna Devi & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 6 November, 2024

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.556 of 2024 Date of decision: 06.11.2024

Sumna Devi & Ors. ...Petitioners.

Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents.

Coram:

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

For the petitioner : Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Advocate.

For the respondents : Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Though the respondents have not filed reply to

the writ petition, however, with the consent of learned

counsel for the parties matter is taken up for disposal at this

stage.

2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of

following substantive reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to count the services of the petitioners from their initial appointment on contract basis till their regularization for the purpose of seniority, increments, pensionary benefits and other consequential benefits in terms of the judgment passed by this Hon' ble in CWP No. 2004/2017 titled as Taj Mohammad v/s State of H.P, CWPOA No 1745/2020 titled as Chaman Lal & Others v/s State of H.P and Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

recently in CWP No.5290/2023 titled as Arun Kumar v/s State of H.P in the interest of justice.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the entire consequential benefits along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of their appointment to the date of realization."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted

that the issue raised by the petitioners in this writ petition

has already been adjudicated upon in CWP No.2004 of 2017

(Taj Mohammad and others Versus The State of

Himachal Pradesh and Others), decided along with

connected matter on 03.08.2023. Learned counsel further

submits that the petitioners would be content in case a

direction is issued to the respondent/competent authority to

consider and decide the respective cases of the petitioners for

redressal of their grievances raised in the writ petition in

light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule.

Learned counsel for the respondents states that

the respondents are not averse to consider the respective

cases of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment,

however, all rights and contentions of the parties be left open

for decision.

4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but

without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition

is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and

decide the respective cases of the petitioners for redressal of

their grievances raised in the writ petition, in accordance

with law and taking into consideration the above judgment in

the case of Taj Mohammad (supra) within a period of six

weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be

communicated to the petitioners.

It is clarified that all rights and contentions of the

parties are left open.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above

terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if

any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua 6 November, 2024 th Judge (Pardeep)