Decided On: 03.10.2024 vs State Of H.P. & Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 14838 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Decided On: 03.10.2024 vs State Of H.P. & Others on 3 October, 2024

Author: Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

                                                                   2024:HHC:9523

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                   CWP No.    11219 of 2024
                                                   Decided on: 03.10.2024
Sh. Suresh Kumar                                          ... Petitioner
                   Versus
State of H.P. & others                       ... Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
____________________________________________________                                       _
For the petitioners     :     Ms. Suchitra Sen, Advocate.

For the respondents             :          Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional
                                           Advocate General.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate

General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of the parties, the petition is being

disposed of at this stage itself.

3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the

following relief:-

"(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to grant the pay scale of Rs.5480-8925 to the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 20th September, 2000 with all consequential benefits instead of the pay scale of Rs.5000-8100 in terms of the judgments referred to in the writ petition and accordingly, arrears of pay & allowances flowing out of grant of revised pay scale of Rs.5490-8925 be also released to the petitioner alongwith interest accrued thereon @ 9% per annum and justice be done."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2024:HHC:9523

by this Court in CWP No.9791 of 2013, titled as Madan Lal vs. State

of H.P. & others and CWPOA No.6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh

vs. State of H.P. & others. Accordingly, she states that the petitioner

shall be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to consider the

case of the petitioner in a time bound manner in light of the

judgment referred to hereinabove.

5. Accordingly, as prayed for, this Writ Petition is disposed

of with the direction that the respondents shall consider the case of

the petitioner in light of the judgment referred hereinabove within a

period of six weeks from today and pass a speaking order thereupon.

It goes without saying that in case the petitioner is found to be

similarly situated as the petitioners in CWP No.9791 of 2013, titled

as Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & others and CWPOA No.6582 of

2019, titled as Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & others, then he will

also be granted the same benefits as stood granted to the petitioners

referred to hereinabove.

6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand

disposed of accordingly.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge October 03, 2024 (Rishi)