Himachal Pradesh High Court
Kaptan Singh & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 19 November, 2024
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
CWP No. 13130/2024
Decided on: 19.11.2024
Kaptan Singh & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents.
...........................................................................................
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner: Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional
Advocate General.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J
Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate
General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following
substantive reliefs:-
"a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus 'or' any other
appropriate writ order or direction may be issued thereby directing
the respondents to grant the financial enhancement/up-gradation
under the new ACPS on completion of 14 years of service on the
post of JBT with all consequential benefits to the petitioners, in the
light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of
this Hon'ble Court in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay
Kumar Vs. State of H.P and ors. a/w connected matters, in the
interest of law and justice.
b) That the respondents may be directed to release the interest @
9% per annum upon the arrears after granting relief no. (a) supra,
in the interest of law and justice.
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
c) That during the pendency of the writ petition the respondents
may directed to consider and decide the fresh representation
dated 08.06.2024(Annexure P-8) after taking into consideration
Annexure P-3(dated 18.12.2018, P-4(dated 22.03.2022), P-6
(25.06.2022) & P-7(1.11.2023), in the interest of law and justice."
3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue involved in
the case has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the
petitioners is that their representation dated 08.06.2024 at Annexure
P-8 has still not been decided by the respondents/competent
authority.
4. Once the legal principle involved in the adjudication of
present petition has already been decided, it is expected from the
welfare State to consider and decide the representation of the
aggrieved employee within a reasonable time and not to sit over the
same in-definitely compelling the employee to come to the Court for
redresssal of his grievances. This is also the purport and object of the
Litigation Policy of the State. Not taking decision on the
representation for months together would not only give rise to
unnecessary multiplication of the litigation but would also bring in
otherwise avoidable increase to the Court docket on unproductive
government induced litigation.
5. In view of above, the instant petition is disposed of by
directing respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the
aforesaid representation of the petitioners, in accordance with law
within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also
communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous
application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge
19th November, 2024(rohit)
