Himachal Pradesh High Court
Hari Dutt Bhardwaj vs State Of Hp And Ors on 7 May, 2025
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP Nos.7534, 7536,
7538 & 7560 of 2025
Date of decision: 07.05.2025
1. CWP No.7534 of 2025
Hari Dutt Bhardwaj. ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of HP and Ors. ...Respondents.
2. CWP No.7536 of 2025
Dharmender Kumar. ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of HP and Ors. ...Respondents.
3. CWP No.7538 of 2025
Kuldeep Kumar. ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of HP and Ors. ...Respondents.
4. CWP No.7560 of 2025
Kamal Nayan. ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of HP and Ors. ...Respondents.
Coram:
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioners : Mr. Devender Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondent(s) : Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy
Advocate General.
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate
General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the
respondents.
2. These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of
almost identical reliefs. The substantive reliefs in CWP
No.7434 of 2025 read as under:-
"i) That the writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
directions may kindly be issued, to the... respondents to
grant the benefits of ACP on completion of 14 years of
regular service with all consequential benefits in terms of
the instructions dated 09.08.2012, 07.07.2014 &
09.09.2014 and respondent department be directed to
modify the pay fixation accordingly.
ii. That the arrear accrued on account of consequential
benefits may kindly be ordered to be paid with interest @
12 % from the date of accrual till the date of realization in
the interest of justice and fair play."
3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue
involved in the cases has already been adjudicated upon. The
grievance of the petitioners is that their respective
representations 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 above, these writ petitions are disposed
of by directing respondents/competent authority to consider
and decide the respective representations of the petitioners, 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
7th May, 2025 Judge
(Pardeep)
