Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24132 (HP)

KULDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/16427/2026 · 2026-09-22

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16427 of 2026 Decided on: 22nd September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kuldeep Singh and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Avneesh Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Seema Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioners seek direction to the respondents to release due and admissible arrears of revised Dearness Allowance w.e.f. 01.07.2021 (sic 01.07.2022) alongwith interest. Additionally, petitioners also seek direction to the respondents to extend them the benefit of office memorandum dated 10.10.2024. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would be satisfied in case they are permitted to make a comprehensive representation to the respondents/competent authority for the redressal of their grievances and the said authority is directed to decide the same in accordance with law within a time bound schedule. Learned Deputy 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 reserving liberty to the petitioners to represent to the respondents/competent authority seeking redressal of their grievances raised in this writ petition. In case such a representation is so made within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks thereafter. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 22, 2026 Judge Mukesh