SUSHMA DEVI v. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER
Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Himachal Pradesh judgment dated 2024-12-19. SUSHMA DEVI v. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 13781/2024 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 19. 12. 2024 1 CWP No. 13781/2024 Renu Bala …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. 2 CWP No. 13783/2024 Harsh Bala …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. 3 CWP No. 13784/2024 Aarti Kaundal …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. 4 CWP No. 13785/2024 Madhu Bala …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. 5 CWP No. 13786/2024 Veena Kumari …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. 6 CWP No. 13787/2024 Reena Kumari …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. 7 CWP No. 13788/2024 Sanjay Bala …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. 8 CWP No. 13780/2024 Sushma Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Anr. . …Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. 1 Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner(s): Mr. Abhinvam Purohit, Mr.
Digvijiay Singh Thakur, Advocates. For the respondent(s): Mr. Y. P. S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. Y. P. S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes “ i. That the present Civil Writ Petition may very kindly be allowed and the respondents may be directed to regularize the service of the petitioner as Staff Nurse from the date petitioner was initially appointed on the said post on contractual basis in the month of August 2006/July 2007, along with all the consequential and financial benefits. ii. That the respondents may kindly be directed to further provide the benefit of the seniority from the date the petitioner was appointed as Staff Nurse alongwith all the consequential and financial benefits to the petitioner. iii.
That the respondent may kindly be directed to consider the case/representation (Annexure P-X) of the petitioner in terms of the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court in a time bound manner. " 3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue involved in the cases has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the petitioners is that their representations, annexed with the respective petitions, have still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority. 4. Once the legal principle involved in the adjudication of present petition has already been decided, it is expected from the welfare State to consider and decide the representation of the aggrieved employee within a reasonable time and not to sit over the same indefinitely compelling the employee to come to the Court for redresssal of his grievances. This is also the purport and object of the Litigation Policy of the State.
Not taking decision on the representation for months together would not only give rise to unnecessary multiplication of the litigation but would also bring in otherwise avoidable increase to the Court docket on unproductive government induced litigation. 5. In view of above, the instant petitions are disposed of by directing respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge th 19 December, 2024(rohit)
Source: High Court of Himachal Pradesh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.