Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sukhvinder Singh vs Hpsebl on 22 November, 2024
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.12114 of 2024 and
connected matters
Decided on: 22nd November, 2024
_________________________________________________________________
1. CWP No. 12114 of 2024
Sukhvinder Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
HPSEBL ...Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
2. CWP No. 12115 of 2024
Sushma Devi ....Petitioner
Versus
HPSEBL ...Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
3. CWP No. 12118 of 2024
Rajiv Kumar ....Petitioner
Versus
HPSEBL ...Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
4. CWP No. 12124 of 2024
Shashi Kant ....Petitioner
Versus
HPSEBL ...Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
1 Whether approved for reporting?
_________________________________________________________________
For the petitioners: Mr. Pankaj Thakur, Advocate.
For the respondents: Msd. Nisha, Advocate vice Mr. Anil
Kumar, Advocate.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Ms. Nisha, Advocate appearing vice Mr.
Anil Kumar, learned Counsel, appears and waives service of
notice on behalf of the respondents in all the above petitions.
3. These writ petitions have been filed for grant of
following common substantive reliefs: -
"A. That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue
the Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ order or directions to the
respondent to grant the benefit of contract service
for the purpose of seniority and other
consequential benefits for promotion and
qualifying service for pensionary and other
benefits.
B. The respondents may be further directed to
release the consequential benefits along with
arrear along with interest @9% interest p.a.."
4. According to the petitioners, the legal issue
involved in the cases has already been adjudicated upon. The
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes
grievance of the petitioners is that their representations,
annexed with the respective writ petitions, have still not been
decided by the respondents/competent authority.
5. 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 indefinitely compelling the
employee to come to the Court for redressal 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.
6. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed
of by directing the respondents/competent authority to
consider and decide the representations 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, also
to stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge
November 22, 2024
R.Atal
