IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7758 of 2025 Decided on: 28th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ashwani …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. H.R. Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved against office order dated 16.10.2020 (Annexure P-1), whereby the respondents have recovered an amount of Rs.20,835/- from him. 3. Petitioner’s case is that he is serving as Warder in the respondent-Prisons & Correctional Services 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Department. He was granted the benefit of increments in the next higher grade pay as admissible under the New Assured Career Progression Scheme (4-9-14)/Old Assured Career Progression Scheme (8-16-24-32), however, later vide office order dated 16.10.2020, the benefit was withdrawn and recovery of Rs.20,835/- was ordered to be effected from the petitioner, which was eventually recovered from him. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Class-III employee, drawing meager salary and is entitled to protection of law laid down in State of Punjab and Ors. vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and Ors.2. Learned counsel further submits that in similar circumstances, recovery ordered by the respondents was quashed and set aside in Roop Lal Versus State of H.P. & Ors.3. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to consider his case for the redressal of grievances in light of the aforesaid judgments within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 2(2015) 4 SCC 334 (2) 3 CWP No.672 of 2023, decided on 18.10.2023 3 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law as also keeping in view the aforesaid judgments 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 May 28, 2025 Judge Mukesh