Himachal Pradesh High Court

Ajay Kumar vs State Of H.P. & Anr on 14 May, 2025

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 16162/2024 Decided on: 14.05.2025

Ajay Kumar ...Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Anr. ....Respondents. ........................................................................................... Coram

The Hon'ble Ms Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J

This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following

substantive reliefs:-

"(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus of any other appropriate writ, order of direction may kindly be issued to the Respondents directing them to grant the benefit of 18 years approved military service towards fixation of pay in favour of the Petitioner from the date of his joining the civil employment.

ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus of any other appropriate writ, order of direction may kindly be issued to the Respondents directing them to grant 18 increments towards fixation of pay in favour of the Petitioner from the date of his joining civil employment.

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

iii) That the Respondents may be directed to release all consequential benefits such as arrears etc. in favour of the Petitioners along with interest @9% p.a."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

issue involved in the petition and relief prayed for by the petitioner

have already been adjudicated in a decision rendered in Babu Ram

Vs. State of H.P. and others 2. Learned counsel further submitted

that the petitioner would be satisfied in case direction is issued to the

respondents/competent authority to consider the case of the

petitioner in light of the aforesaid decision within a time bound

schedule.

3. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to

this prayer.

4. In view of above submissions, but without examining the

merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the