Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19269 (HP)

GAGAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/11784/2025 · 2025-08-08

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. 11784/2025 Decided on: 08.08.2025 Gagan Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Mehar Chand Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal at this stage. 2. It appears that petitioner made a representation seeking benefit of Himachal Pradesh Civil Servies (Revised Pay) Rule 2022. The said representation was rejected by respondent No.4 on 28.05.2025 (Annexure P-3). Petitioner feels aggrieved against the rejection of his claim for benefit of higher stage of pay under 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Himachal Pradesh Civil Servies (Revised Pay) Rule 2022, has instituted this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and reliefs prayed for by him have already been adjudicated upon in Mohit Sharma & Anr. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 The impugned rejection conveyed by the respondents vide office letter dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure P-3) is not in consonance with the decision rendered in Mohit Sharma2. 4. A perusal of the impugned decision as contained in Annexure P-3 reflects that Mohit Sharma2 was not applied while deciding the representation of the petitioner. For that reason alone, the impugned decision as communicated in office letter dated 28.05.2025 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh, in accordance with law, keeping in view of Mohit Sharma2. This exercise shall be undertaken within six weeks. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 08th August, 2025(rohit) 2 CWP No 1038/2024 decided on 29.11.2024