Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10138 (HP)

RAJINDER KUMAR v. THE HPSEBL AND ANOTHER

CWP/4412/2025 · 2025-03-26

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Special Leave Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 4412/2025 Decided on: 26.03.2025 Rajinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus HPSEBL & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Kul Bhushan Khajuria, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. V.S.Kanwar, Advocate. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Petitioner seeks benefits of the decision rendered in Satya Devi Vs. State of H.P. and others.2 2. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the judgment in Satya Devi’s2 case has been assailed by the respondents by filing Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 20496/2024. The common decision passed in several other matters connected with Satya Devi’s case has also been assailed by the respondents by filing separate Special Leave Petitions including State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Inder Pal3. Copy of an order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 24.03.2025 in several connected Special Leave Petitions with lead 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2CWP No. 2274 of 2021 and connected matters. decided on 28.05.2024 3Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 11306/2025 2 case State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Inder Pal3 was placed on record, which reads as under:- “1. Delay condoned. 2. Let the notice be issued to the respondent(s) in all the matters. 3. Tag alongwith SLP© No. 20496/2024. 4. In the meantime the operation of the impugned order(s) is/are stayed.” In view of the fact that operation of impugned order(s) (common judgment rendered on 28.05.2024) in all connected Special Leave Petition has been stayed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, this writ petition is disposed of with direction that benefits, if any, flowing to the petitioner under Satya Devi’s2 case, shall abide by the outcome of the Inder Pal’s3 case instituted by the respondents against the common judgment rendered in Satya Devi’s2 case. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 26th March, 2025(rohit)