Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28987 (HP)

LAKSHMI BHARDWAJ v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/1908/2025 · 2025-03-21

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.1908 of 2025 Date of decision: 21.03.2025 Lakshmi Bhardwaj. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3-State. : Ms. Komal Chaudhary, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General and Ms. Komal Chaudhary, Advocate, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and respondent No.4, respectively. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief(s):- “i). That the respondents may be ordered to take into account the entire service rendered by the petitioner from the date of her initial appointment as J.B.T. Teacher for the purpose of qualifying service and the said period of service as JBT teacher upto the date of 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- regularization be ordered to be taken into account for the purpose of enhanced pension and other retiral benefits and the benefits incidental thereof may also be ordered to be paid to the petitioner from the due date.” 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redresssal of her grievances raised in the writ petition. 4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring 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 further period of six weeks. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 21st March, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)