_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 4155 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Anr on 24 February, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                               CWP No.1137 of 2025
                                        Date of Decision: 24.2.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Harish Chander Sharma
                                                                   .........Petitioner
                                 Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr.
                                                                 .......Respondents

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner:         Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate.

For the respondents:        Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr.
                            B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and
                            Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for

following main reliefs:

"A) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to count the service rendered by the petitioner on contract basis i.e. w.e.f. 13.04.2006 to 29.07.2013, as qualifying service for the purpose of annual increments and other retiral benefits under Central Civil Services Pension Rules 1972, in view of the law laid down in Sheela Devi Case Supra and upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court, CWP No. 2411/2019 titled as Jagdeesh Chand versus State of Himachal Pradesh and LPA 338/2024 titled as Narayan Dutt Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and other batch of petitioner.

B) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue the Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction the respondent to grant the benefit of contract service for the purpose all consequential benefits including increments and qualifying service for pensionary benefit."

2. Before reply could be elicited from the respondents,

learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the judgment

passed by the Division Bench of this court CWP No. 2411 of 2019

titled Jagdeesh Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh, states that issue

sought to be decided in the instant petition already stands adjudicated

by the Principal Division Bench and as such, petitioner would be

content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents

to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in terms of the

aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner.

3. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents,

Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, states that

though the case of the petitioner is not covered by the aforesaid

judgment, but representation, if any, filed shall be considered in

accordance with law.

4. Consequently, in view of the fair stand taken by the

learned Additional Advocate General, this Court without going into the

merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with

direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the

pending representation expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks.

Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing

the needful, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner

and pass a speaking order thereupon. Liberty is also reserved to the

petitioner to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate court

of law, if he still remains aggrieved.

5. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of

alongwith pending applications, if any.

February 24, 2025                                 (Sandeep Sharma),
     (manjit)                                         Judge