Champa Devi vs State Of H.P. & Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 5985 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Champa Devi vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 23 May, 2025

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6462 of 2025 Date of decision: 23.05.2025 Champa Devi. ...Petitioner.

Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents.

Coram:

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?

For the petitioner : Dr. Nidhi Singh, Advocate, vice Mr. C.N. Singh, Advocate.

For the respondents : Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 4-State.

: Mr. Tara Chand Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.5.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate

General and Mr. Tara Chand Chauhan, Advocate, appear

and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to

2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of

following substantive relief:-

"i. Issue a writ of Certiorari, Madamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, by directing the respondents department to grant/Release the pension in favour of the petitioner w.e.f 1.08.2024 in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 4792/2022

1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

Title Balo Devi Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors, along with 12% interest for delayed payment with in time bound manner.

ii. Issue a writ of Mandamus Or other appropriate writ order or direction, by directing the respondent department to pay/award Cost in favour of the Petitioner in terms of the law laid down by the « Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No.30326/2023 title The Special Land Acquisition Officer Versus Vithal Rao as well as in SLP (Civil) No.3398/2024 titled State of Rajsthan & Ors Versus Gopal Bijawat, for dragging the petitioner (Class-

IV Employee/leady)for dragging the Petitioner into the un-necessary litigation contrary to the litigation policy framed by the respondents department."

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner has represented to the

respondents on 27.12.2024 (Annexure P-6), however, the

competent authority has till date not taken any call on the

aforesaid representation. Learned counsel further submits

that the petitioner would be content in case the

respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to decide

the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule.

Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this

prayer.

4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but

without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition

is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent

authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation

of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of six

weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be

communicated to the petitioner.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above

terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if

any.

                                          Jyotsna Rewal Dua
23rd May, 2025                                 Judge
   (Pardeep)