Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28349 (HP)

AJAY KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/16162/2024 · 2025-05-14

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. 16162/2024 Decided on: 14.05.2025 Ajay Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram The Hon’ble Ms Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus of any other appropriate writ, order of direction may kindly be issued to the Respondents directing them to grant the benefit of 18 years approved military service towards fixation of pay in favour of the Petitioner from the date of his joining the civil employment. ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus of any other appropriate writ, order of direction may kindly be issued to the Respondents directing them to grant 18 increments towards fixation of pay in favour of the Petitioner from the date of his joining civil employment. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 iii) That the Respondents may be directed to release all consequential benefits such as arrears etc. in favour of the Petitioners along with interest @9% p.a.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in the petition and relief prayed for by the petitioner have already been adjudicated in a decision rendered in Babu Ram Vs. State of H.P. and others2. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied in case direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid decision within a time bound schedule. 3. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. In view of above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner, in accordance with law and in light of the aforesaid judgment within a period of 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 14th May, 2025(rohit) 2CWP No.6443 of 2021, decided on 09.05.2022