Rampal & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 15849 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Rampal & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 28 October, 2024

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 11524/2024 Decided on: 28.10.2024

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

........................................................................................... Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Adarsh K. Vashisht, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J

Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, 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:-

"(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to count the services rendered by the petitioners on contract basis prior to their regularization as qualifying service for the purpose of pension under CCS Pension Rules, 1972 for the purpose of annual increments and leave encashment, in the interest of 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 24.06.2024 (Annexure P-

2) has still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority.

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

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 28th October, 2024(rohit)