Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2023 DAILYLAW 881 (HP)

KULDEEP RAO v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/7643/2023 · 2026-09-09

Ajay Mohan Goel, Yogesh Jaswal

body2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 7643 of 2023 Decided on: October 13, 2023 ________________________________________________________ Kuldeep Rao ……….. Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …. Respondents ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Thakur and Mr. Aman Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Anoop Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Ms. Sunaina, Deputy Advocates General. ________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): The petitioner retired from the post of Superintending Engineer on 31.12.2017, on attaining the age of superannuation, with the respondent/Secretariat. 2. Subsequent thereto, an office order dated 01.12.2022 was issued, revising the petitioner’s pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.2016, in pursuance to Himachal Pradesh Civil Service (Revised Pay) Rules, 2022, notified by the Department of Finance (Pay Revision), Government of Himachal Pradesh, vide notification dated 03.01.2022, circulated vide the Head Office Memorandum dated 21.06.2022. Consequently, the petitioner became entitled to get arrears of revised pay w.e.f. 01.01.2016 to 30.4.2018, but the same, according to the 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 petitioner, has not been paid to him till date. This fact has not been disputed by Counsel for the respondents. 3. That apart, pension, gratuity and leave encashment benefits payable to the petitioner are also required to be revised as per office memorandum dated 25.02.2022 issued by the Finance Department for revising the pension, gratuity and leave encashment of the retired employees after 01.01.2016. The petitioner alleges that this has also not been done. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on order dated 31.5.2023 of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2108 of 2023. In the said judgment, Hon’ble Division Bench has observed as under:- “Having regard to the reasons assigned in the said order and since the case of the petitioner in the instant case is also on the similar footing, the instant writ petition is also allowed by directing the respondents to pay arrears of pay as per the revision of the pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2016 to 30.11.2020 with interest @ 6% per annum from the due date till the date of its realization as per Annexure P-2. A further direction is also issued to the respondents to revise the pension, gratuity (DCRG) and leave encashment, as per Annexure P-2 and to pay the same alongwith interest @ 6% per annum to the petitioner w.e.f. the due date i.e. 01.12.2020, till the date of its realization. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.” 5. Both learned counsel have agreed that this Court had granted relief to similarly placed petitioners in CWP No.2108 of 2023 on 31.05.2023 and in CWP No.2421 of 2023 on 15.06.2023. Therefore, 3 this writ petition is allowed for reasons alike and the respondents are directed to pay arrears of pay as per the revision of pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2016 to 31.12.2017 with interest @ 6% per annum from the due date till the date of its realization and they shall also revise the pension, gratuity & leave encashment and pay the same alongwith interest @ 6% per annum to the petitioner w.e.f. 01.01.2016 till the date of its realization. All pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge October 13, 2023 Vikrant