( 2025:HHC:17301 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA LPA No. 78 of 2022 Decided on: 2nd June, 2025 __________________________________________________ The State of H.P and another ....Appellants. Versus Dev Raj …Respondent ___________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Appellants: Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General. For the respondent: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) The present appeal filed by the State is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.5179 of 2021 decided on 25.11.2021. 2. It is pertinent to notice that by common judgment, two cases were disposed off and the other case was CWP No.5178 of 2021 titled as Tikkam Ram Vs. State of H.P. and another. It is brought to our notice that LPA No.131 of 2022 filed by the State against the said judgment already stands dismissed by the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 coordinate Bench on 27.02.2023, the relevant part of the same reads as under:- “Aggrieved by the judgment passed by the learned Writ Court, the writ respondents have filed the instant appeal. 2. The writ petitioner joined services of the appellant against the vacancy reserved for ex-servicemen and was appointed as Deputy Commissioner, Excise and Taxation on 14.09.2011 on regular basis. 3. Since the active military service rendered by the petitioner was not being counted for the purpose of pay fixation from the date of his appointment in civil employment against the post reserved for ex-servicemen, hence he was constrained to file writ petition being CWP No. 5178 of 2021. The said petition came to be allowed alongwith another writ petition being CWP No. 5179 of 2021, titled as Dev Raj v. The State of Himachal Pradesh & another, vide a common judgment dated 25.11.2021, however with a rider that the findings returned by the learned Writ Court would be subject to a similar issue pending before the learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA. 4. Here it needs to be emphasized that the issue in question, in fact, had already been decided by learned Division Bench of this Court in a judgment authored by one of us (Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.), in CWP No. 4654 of 2013, titled as Avtar Singh Dyal v. H.P. State Electricity Board Ltd. and connected matters, decided on 26.11.2014. However, it appears that when the judgment in Avtar Singh Dyal's case was followed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWPOA No. 231 of 2019, titled as Amar Nath and others v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 15.07.2020, the State preferred an appeal being LPA No. 34 of 2021, titled as State of H.P. v. Amar Nath & others, to show that that matter was still at large. 5. This, in fact, constrained the learned Writ Court to make the impugned judgment subject to the outcome of LPA No. 34 of 3 2021, as would be evident from paras 4 and 5 of the impugned judgment, which read as under:- 4. At this stage, learned Additional Advocate General submits that though the issue is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Amar Nath’s case (supra), but as per his instructions, an LPA has been preferred by the State against the said judgment, though operation of the said judgment has not been stayed by the Hon’ble Division Bench. 5. Be that as it may, these petitions are disposed of by holding that the findings returned by this Court in CWPOA No. 231 of 2019, titled as Sh. Amar Nath and others Vs. State of H.P. and others, decided on 15.07.2020 shall mutatis mutandis apply to these petitions also and all directions so issued by this Court in the said judgment shall be construed as having been issued in these petitions also. However, it is clarified that these writ petitions shall also abide by the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench in the Letters Patent Appeal, which has been preferred by the State against the judgment passed in Amar Nath’s case (supra). Miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 6. Now, even the LPA alongwith connected matters stand decided by the learned Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 09.05.2022, whereby the LPA preferred in Amar Nath's case (supra) has been ordered to be dismissed, whereas the connected writ petitions preferred by ex-servicemen have been allowed, mainly on the ground that the issue is no more res integra in terms of the judgment already rendered by this Court in Avtar Singh Dyal's case (supra). Additionally, we find that the appellants have not even chosen to assail the common judgment rendered in Dev Raj's case (supra), which has attained finality and, thus, the instant appeal would otherwise be not maintainable. 4 7. Consequently, for the reasons stated above, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.” 3. Keeping in view the above observations, we are of the considered opinion that once the judgment has already been upheld by the Coordinate Bench, we do not find any plausible reason as such to interfere with the same. More so we have noticed that the learned Single Judge has also relied upon the judgment in CWPOA No.231 of 2019 titled as Amar Nath and others vs. State of H.P and others. The learned Single Judge also noticed that the said judgment had not been stayed while deciding the issue at that point of time. The coordinate Bench had also noticed that LPA No.34 of 2021 titled as State of H.P vs. Amar Nath and others, already stands dismissed on 09.05.2022. In such circumstances, the present appeal is also dismissed on the same terms. All pending applications are disposed off accordingly. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice 2nd June, 2025 ( Ranjan Sharma ) (priti) Judge