Himachal Pradesh High Court
Vijay Kumar vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 23 October, 2024
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
CWP No. 11166/2024
Decided on: 23.10.2024
Vijay Kumar ....Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Ors.. ......Respondents
.............................................................................................
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Davinder Chauhan Jaita,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Amandeep Sharma,Additional
Advocates General.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Notice. Mr. Amandeep 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 following
substantive reliefs:-
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes
"i) That the petitioner be considered for all benefit of his service
in the nature of increment and pensionary benefit for the period
under which he has worked as contract employee followed by his
regularization from the initial date of appointment.
ii) That, the petitioner be considered for seniority and
consequential benefits by counting his entire service especially on
contract basis from the initial date of appointment for all benefits in
terms of the judgments as annexed herewith this vide SLP (C) No.
10399/2020 and other connected petitions decided on 07.08.2023 by
Hon'ble Supreme Court India in case State of H.P. & others Vs.
Sheela Devi and CWP No. 2004/2017 alongwith CWP No. 629/2018
decided on 03.08.2023 titled as Tajmohmad & others. Vs. State of
H.P. & others alongwith other connected case.'
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue
raised by the petitioner in this writ petition has already been adjudicated
upon in State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Vs. Sheela Devi2. 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 grievances
raised in the writ petition in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed
time schedule.
Learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents
states that the respondents are not averse to consider the case of the
petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment, however, all rights and
contentions of the parties be left open for decision.
SLP(c) No. 10399/2020 decided on 07.08.2023
5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, 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 grievance raised in the writ petition, in
accordance with law and taking into consideration the above judgment
in the case of Sheela Devi's case, 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
Judge
October 23, 2024 (Rohit)
