Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19395 (HP)

KASHMIR SINGH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/898/2022 · 2025-05-21

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. 898/2022 Decided on: 21.05.2025 Kashmir Singh & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J CMP No.11014/2025 For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and disposed of. CWP No. 898/2022 2. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “ a. That writ in the nature of Certiorari may kindly be issued and corrigendum dated 29-03-2019(Annexure P-9) may kindly be quashed and set aside. b. That respondents may kindly be directed to release the consequential benefits (arrears) as per order dated 15th September, 2018, which further clarify vide letter dated 15-09- 2018, including arrears w.e.f. 01-01-2012. Or in alternate 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 respondents may be directed to release the arrears on account of retrospective regularization of petitioners from the date from which petitioners had served the respondents on full time basis, after joining as daily waged employees.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue raised in the writ petition and the reliefs prayed for by the petitioners have already been adjudicated in Tilak Raj Vs. State of H.P. and others2. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners would be content, if the cases of the petitioners are considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgment within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioners, in accordance with law and in light of the aforesaid judgment within a period of four weeks. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 21st May, 2025(rohit) 22 CWPOA No. 6726 of 2020, decided on 02.05.2024