Himachal Pradesh High Court
Rakesh Kumar And Others vs State Of H.P. And Others on 21 May, 2025
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.8344 of 2025 alongwith
CWP No.8348 of 2025
Decided on: 21st May, 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CWP No.8344 of 2025
Rakesh Kumar and others .....Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. and others .....Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CWP No.8348 of 2025
Ajay Kumar and others .....Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. and another .....Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General
with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional
Advocate General.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional
Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on
behalf of the respondents.
Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2. Both these writ petitions have been filed for the
grant of almost identical reliefs. The substantive reliefs in
CWP No.8344 of 2025 read as under:-
"1. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued
directing the respondents to grant to the petitioners the
benefit of higher stage of pay of Rs.40,100/- from the
date the petitioners have completed two years of their
respective regular service as per the judgment passed
by the Hon'ble Court in CWP No.1638/2024 titled Mohit
Sharma versus State of H.P. & others. Further direct the
respondents to release to the petitioners all the
consequential benefits along with arrears at the rate of
9% per annum.
2. That the respondents may also be directed to release
the arrears of pay after re-fixing the pay of the
petitioners at Rs.40,100/- w.e.f. the date the petitioners
completed two years of their respective regular service
along with interest @ 9% per annum."
3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue
involved in these cases has already been adjudicated upon.
The grievance of the petitioners is that their representations
each dated 21.04.2025 (Annexure P-2 Colly.), have still not
been decided by the respondents/competent authority.
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 indefinitely
compelling the employee to come to the Court for redressal
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 the above, these writ petitions are
disposed of by directing the respondents/competent
authority to consider and decide the aforesaid
representations of the petitioners dated 21.04.2025
(Annexure P-2 Colly.) in accordance with law within a
period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also
communicated to the petitioners.
The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above
terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if
any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
May 21, 2025 Judge
Mukesh
