BRIJ MOHAN AND ORS v. STATE OF HP AND ORS
Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Himachal Pradesh judgment dated 2020-12-24. BRIJ MOHAN AND ORS v. STATE OF HP AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2916 of 2020 a/w CWP Nos. 2917 and 2915 of 2020 Date of Decision: 24. 12. 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ CWP No. 2916 of 2020 Vikas Gupta and others …. Petitioners. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others ….. Respondents. CWP No. 2917 of 2020 Brij Mohan and others …. Petitioners. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others ….. Respondents. CWP No. 2925 of 2020 Avtar Singh and others ….. Petitioners. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh ….. Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. For the petitioner(s): Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate, in all the petitions. For the respondents: M/s Somesh Raj, Additional Advocate General, with Ms. Divya Sood, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent State.
(Through Video Conferencing) Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral): When these cases were taken up for consideration, the Court has been informed that the services of the petitioners stand th regularized now, as is evident from order dated 16 December, 2020. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though now the services of the petitioners have been regularized, but they are still aggrieved by the date of regularization, because according to them, their services are liable to regularized on completion of eight years of service with all consequential benefits. 3.
In my considered view, as now there is a fresh cause, which has accrued in favour of the petitioners, therefore, post regularization of their services, in case they are still aggrieved by the said order, may be on the ground that their regularization has to be after completion of eight years of service as from the date of initial appointment, these petitions are ordered to be closed, however, with liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate Court of law for redressal of their grievances, including the grievances raised by learned counsel for the petitioners of belated regularization of services of the petitioners. This liberty obviously is subject to all just exceptions available to the respondentState. Miscellaneous applications , if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge December 24, 2020 (bhupender)
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.