Shashi Gupta vs State Of H.P. & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 17923 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Shashi Gupta vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 22 November, 2024

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10498 of 2024 Date of decision: 22.11.2024

Shashi Gupta. ...Petitioner.

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

Coram:

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

For the petitioner : Mr. Manoj Thakur, Advocate.

For the respondents : Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on

behalf of the respondents.

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

following substantive reliefs:-

"(a) That the respondent-State may kindly be ordered to count the entire contract service of the petitioner for the purpose of annual increments as well as pensionary benefits as per the judgments this Hon'ble Court in "CWPOA No.195 of 2019, titled as Sheela Devi vs. State of H.P. and others" and "CWPOA No.2411 of 2019, titled as Jagdish Chand vs. State of H.P. and others."

3. According to the petitioner, the legal issue

involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon. The 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

grievance of the petitioner is that her representation dated

22.07.2024 (Annexure P-5) 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 indefinitely compelling the

employee to come to the Court for redressal of their

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 the above, this writ petition is disposed

of by directing the respondents/competent authority to

consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the

petitioner in accordance with law within a period of six weeks

from today. The order so passed be also communicated to

the petitioner.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above

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

any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua 21 November, 2024 th Judge (Pardeep)