Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25719 (HP)

RAM DEI v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/13264/2024 · 2025-05-29

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.13264 of 2024 Date of decision: 29.05.2025 Ram Dei. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “1). That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, thereby directing the respondents to grant the pay scale to the Petitioner, revised w.e.f. 1-1-1996 of Rs. 5480-8925, from the pay scale 1640-2925, as was admissible to the post of Shastri Teachers, instead of Pay scale of Rs. 5000-8100 as granted to him, on his initial appointment, with all consequential benefits and arrears may kindly be ordered to be paid with interest at the rate of 12% per annum in favour of the Petitioner, in the interest of justice and fair play. -2- 2) That the respondents may kindly be further directed to consider the contractual services rendered by the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record office order dated 18.02.2024 and submits that first relief of the petitioner has now been granted to her. He further submits that on the basis of aforesaid office order, petitioner be permitted to represent to the respondents for second relief and thereafter, the competent authority be directed to decide the said representation within a time- bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General 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 by permitting the petitioner to prefer a representation within two weeks from today. In case, such representation is so preferred, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. -3- The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 29th May, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)