Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21103 (HP)

JOGI RAM BHARDWAJ v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CMP/18834/2025 · 2025-08-11

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Jogi Ram Bhardwaj Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. CWP No. 2503 of 2024 11.08.2025 Present: Mr. A.K.Gupta & Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, for the respondents-State. CMP No. 18834 of 2025 Through instant application, prayer has been made on behalf of applicant/petitioner for recalling of judgment dated 04.06.2025 passed in CWP No. 2503 of 2024, titled as Jogi Ram Bhardwaj Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. on the ground that in last para of the judgment word “considered” came to be used by this Court for pay revision in terms of notification dated 27.09.2012 from the due date. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that modification, as prayed for, is not necessary because if the judgment is read in its entirety, it clearly suggests that needful is required to be done, in terms of notification dated 27.09.2012. This Court is persuaded to agree with Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, for the reason that, while directing respondents to consider the category of Firemen for pay revision, in terms of notification dated 27.09.2012 from the due date, this Court has also directed the Principal Secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, to take appropriate action in accordance with law on the recommendation dated 05.09.2022 made by ADG-cum-Director Fire Services, Himachal Pradesh, expeditiously, wherein he has successfully demonstrated that category of Firemen is equivalent to the category of Police Constable, to whom benefit of pay revision, in terms of notification dated 27.07.2012 from due date, has already been extended. In view of the above, nothing is required to be modified in the judgment, as detailed hereinabove, save and except date of appointment of the petitioner mentioned as September, 2012 in para 1 the judgment, shall be read as “30.12.2016”. August 11, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge