Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13971 (HP)

NANDAN GOPAL v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/6116/2024 · 2025-05-16

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6116 of 2024 Decided on: 16th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nandan Gopal …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved against office letter dated 21.09.2022 (Annexure P-7), conveying the decision of rejection of his representation for grant of ACP after completion of 32 years of service on the ground that re-revision of pay structures has to be treated as financial enhancement. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition has now been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Sanjay Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others2, wherein, it has been held that financial upgradation, if any, on account of pay revision cannot be a ground to deny benefit under the ACPS. 4. In view of the aforesaid decision rendered in Sanjay Kumar2, the decision of the respondents as contained in office letter dated 21.09.2022 (Annexure P-7) is quashed and set aside. The respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law as also in light of the decision in Sanjay Kumar2 and pass appropriate order 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 16, 2025 Judge Mukesh 2 CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, decided alongwith connected matters on 01.11.2023