Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Review Petition No. 75 of 2025 Decided on: 08.09.2025 ______________________________________________________________ Purshotam Kumar Sharma
....Petitioner Versus
HPSEBL & Anr.
…Respondents _ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Shivom Vashista, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ravinder Thakur, Advocate. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge
(oral) Heard. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent from paragraphs No. 7, 9 and 15 of judgment dated 21.05.2024, passed in CWPOA No. 5504 of 2020, that claim of the petitioner for allowing him annual increment w.e.f. 01.01.1996 was decided in his favour. However, inadvertently in the directions contained in last lines of paragraph 16 of the impugned judgment, direction to restore pay of the petitioner at Rs. 8825/ per month has been issued w.e.f. 01.01.1997 instead of 01.01.1996. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
2. In view of above, judgment dated 21.05.2024 is modified to the extent that direction contained in paragraph 16, whereby pay of the petitioner was ordered to be restored at Rs. 8825/ per month w.e.f. 01.01.1997, be now read as 01.01.1996 instead of 01.01.1997. Necessary corrections be carried out at appropriate places and corrected order be placed on record as well be uploaded at the official website of the High Court.
3. Petition is allowed and disposed of in aforesaid terms.
( Vivek Singh Thakur ) Judge
( Sushil Kukreja )
September 08, 2025 Judge
(raman)