Balvir vs The State Of H.P. & Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 16237 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Balvir vs The State Of H.P. & Anr on 23 October, 2024

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

CWP No.11126 of 2024

Decided on: 23.10.2024

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Balvir                                                            ...........Petitioner

                                               Versus

The State of H.P. & Anr.                                          ........Respondents

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the Petitioner: Mr. Yogesh K. Chandel, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate

General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the

respondents.

2. The petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to

regularize his service w.e.f. 18.06.2011 i.e. the date of his initial

appointment on contract basis with all consequential benefits

including annual increments, promotion, seniority, pay fixation,

ACP, pensionary benefits and regular pay scale etc. The relief

has been claimed in light of decisions rendered in Om Parkash

Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

Vs. State of H.P. & Others2, State of H.P. and Ors. Vs. Om

Parkash3, Manju Devi Vs. State of H.P4, Kuldip Chand & Ors.

Vs. State of H.P5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

aforesaid judgments have attained finality, the respondents have

implemented these judgments, therefore, the petitioner is also

required to be extended same and similar benefits as have been

allowed by the respondents to the similarly situated persons in

view of the above cited judgments. Reference in this regard was

made to office order dated 18.06.2024 (Annexure P-5).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner has also preferred his representation to the

respondents on 18.08.2024 (Annexure P-6). However, the same

has not yet been decided, causing injustice to the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner would be satisfied in case respondents are directed to

consider the petitioner's case for grant of reliefs prayed for by

him in light of the above judgments within a time bound

schedule.

Learned Additional Advocate General has no

objection for considering the case of the petitioner in light of the

aforesaid judgments.

CWP No.7602 of 2010 decided on 02.05.2012,

LPA No.54 of 2013 decided on 04.10.2019,

CWP No.3143 of 2011 decided on 02.05.2012,

CWP No.414 of 2014 decided on 24.04.2014

4. Hence, having regard to the above submissions of

the parties but without examining the merits of the case, the

respondents are directed to examine the case of the petitioner in

accordance with law and in light of the law laid down in Om

Parkash Vs. State of H.P. & Others2, State of H.P. and Ors.

Vs. Om Parkash3, Manju Devi Vs. State of H.P4, Kuldip Chand

& Ors. Vs. State of H.P5, within a period of six weeks' from

today. The order so passed be also communicated to the

petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of in the above

directions. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall

also stands disposed of.

                                           Jyotsna Rewal Dua
October 23, 2024                                Judge
     R.Atal