Himachal Pradesh High Court
vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors on 22 October, 2024
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
( 2024:HHC:10057 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 11784/2024
Decided on: 22nd October, 2024
Amit Kumar .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.. .....Respondents
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocates
General.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional
Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on
behalf of the respondents
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the
parties, the matter is heard at this stage.
3. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of
following substantive reliefs:
" 1. That the writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
directions may kindly be issued, to the respondents to
grant the 2nd benefit of ACP on completion of 9 years of
regular service in the cadre of TGT (Medical) from due
Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2 ( 2024:HHC:10057 )
date i.e. from the year 2015 with all consequential
benefits.
2. That writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ order or directions may be issued to
directing the respondents to also pay the consequential
arrears alongwith interest @9% per annum."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the issue raised by the petitioner in this writ petition
has already been adjudicated upon in Sanjay Kumar Vs.
State of H.P. & Ors2. alongwith connected matter.
Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would
be content in case a direction is issued to the
respondent/competent authority to consider and decide the
case of the petitioner for redressal of his grievance raised in
the writ petition in light of the aforesaid judgment within a
fixed time schedule.
Learned Additional Advocate General is not
averse to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the
aforesaid judgment. He however submits that all rights and
contentions of the parties be left open for decision.
4. Having regard to the aforesubmissions, but
without examining the merits of the matter, this writ
petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to
consider and decide the case of the petitioner for redressal
of his grievances raised in the writ petition, in accordance
CWPOA No. 5536/2020 decided on 01.11.2023
3 ( 2024:HHC:10057 )
with law and taking into consideration the above judgment
in the case of Sanjay Kumar, supra, within a period of six
weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be
communicated to the petitioner.
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
October 22, 2024 Judge
rohit
