Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12926 (HP)

KISHORI LAL v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/8082/2025 · 2025-05-29

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.8082 of 2025 Decided on: 29th May, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Kishori Lal ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Mohar Chand Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Leena Guleria, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “i) That the respondents may be directed to grant benefits of extension in services to the petitioner in terms of notification dated 24.09.2015 and 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - 30.11.2015 also newly notified notification dated 06.02.2025. ii) That the writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued directing the respondents to pay the petitioner the same pay as he was drawing at the time of his retirement and shall also continue to avail the benefit of increment granted to him in lieu of the state Award, in view of the Policy dated 24.09.2015 coupled with the Clarification dated 18.04.2017 (P-7).” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred a representations dated 29.12.2023 and 04.03.2025 (Annexures P-4 and P-9) to respondent/Competent Aurhority claiming the above reliefs. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case respondent /competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representations within a fixed time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioner in accordance with law - 3 - 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 Judge May 29, 2025 R.Atal