Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18981 (HP)

PRAKASH CHAND v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/10600/2025 · 2025-07-03

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

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.10600 of 2025 Date of decision: 03.07.2025 Prakash Chand. ...Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant 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:- “i). That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to grant to the petitioner the benefit of difference of the minimum of the band pay + grade pay paid to him on his appointment on contractual basis and to which he is entitled after the pay revision w.e.f 1.1.2016 to 04.10.2017 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 petitioner submits that the petitioner has represented to the respondents on 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-3), however, the competent authority has till date not taken any call on the aforesaid representation. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to decide the aforesaid representation 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 representation of the petitioner in accordance with law 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 3rd July, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)