Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4854 (HP)

ANIL SHARMA v. THE HPTDCL

CWP/360/2025 · 2025-01-06

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.360 of 2025 Decided on: 6th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anil Sharma …..Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Limited .....Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate vice Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate. For the Respondent: Ms. Maheshwari Sharma, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Maheshwari Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to release the advance dearness allowance, interim relief and arrear of pay revision alongwith statutory interest within time bound manner.” 3. Learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the relief 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 prayed for by him have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Tulsi Ram Versus The Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. & ors.2. Learned vice counsel also submits that the petitioner has already preferred a representation to the respondent on 25.06.2024 (Annexure P-2) for claiming the above relief. Learned vice counsel further submits that the petitioner be permitted to prefer a fresh comprehensive representation to the respondent within a period of two weeks and thereafter the competent authority be directed to decide the said representation within a time bound schedule. Learned counsel for the respondent 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 file a fresh comprehensive representation to the respondent/ competent authority within a period of two weeks from today. In case such a representation is received by the respondent within the aforesaid period, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of 2 CWP No.4427 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matters on 11.01.2024 3 Tulsi Ram2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at 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 January 06, 2025 Judge Mukesh