POONAM VERMA AND ANOTHER v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER
CWP/10604/2025 · 2025-07-03
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 18975 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 18975 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10604 of 2025
Date of decision: 03.07.2025 Poonam Verma & Anr.
...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.
...Respondents.
Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners : Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate.
For the respondents : Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2.
This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief(s):-
“1. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to grant to the petitioners the benefit of difference of the minimum of the band pay + grade pay paid to them on their appointment on contractual basis and to which they are entitled after the pay revision w.e.f 25.08.2018 to 23.10.2021 in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 2056/2023 titled as Ghanshyam Dass & others versus State of H.P & others and further the respondents be directed to release to the petitioners all the consequential benefits along with arrears at the rate of 9% per annum.”
-2-
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have represented to the respondents on 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-3 Colly.), however, the competent authority has till date not taken any call on the aforesaid representations. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to decide the aforesaid representations within a fixed-time schedule.
Learned counsel for the respondents 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 petitioners in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua 3rd July, 2025
Judge (Pardeep)