_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 204 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors on 1 May, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                               CWP No.2165 of 2023
                                          Date of Decision: 1.5.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Veer Bahadur
                                                           .........Petitioner
                                 Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
                                                          .......Respondents

Coram

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

For the Petitioner:       Mr. P.D. Nanda, Advocate.
s

For the respondents:      Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr.
                          Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.
                          Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr.
                          Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for
                          respondents No. 1 and 2.
                          Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Senior Advocate with
                          Mr. Aastha Kohli, Advocate, for respondent
                          No.3.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for

following relief:

"i) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner with effect from 1.4.1999 instead from 9.9.2007 with all consequential benefits."

2. Though by way of filing reply to the petition, respondents

No. 2 and 3 have refuted the claim of the petitioner, but have not

specifically denied factum with regard to applicability of judgment

dated 24.9.2014 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP

No. 7140 of 2012, titled Gian Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh and

Ors., wherein issue otherwise sought to be decided in the instant

proceedings has been already adjudicated.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states

that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case he is permitted

to make representation to the respondents to consider and decide his

case in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner.

4. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is

disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to

the competent authority within ten days, praying therein to redress

his grievances as raised in the petition in light of Gian Singh (supra),

which in turn shall be decided by the competent authority within four

weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful

in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to

the petitioner and pass a speaking order. All pending applications

stand disposed of.

May 1, 2025                                       (Sandeep Sharma),
     (manjit)                                           Judge