SATYA NARAIN SNEHI v. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION) AND OTHERS
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 2024-12-23. SATYA NARAIN SNEHI v. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION) AND OTHERS. Read the judgment and case...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15908/2024 Decided on: 23. 12. 2024 Dr. Satya Narain Snehi …Petitioner Versus The Principal Secretary & Ors. . …Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. 1 Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Tarun K. Sharma Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L. N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. L. N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) That the respondents may be directed to count the contract service as Assistant Professor(Hindi) College cadre towards total length of service as Assistant Professor for grant of placement/Promotion may kindly be allowed with all consequential benefits with interest. (ii) That the petitioner's contract service w. e. f. 18. 04. 1998 to 31. 12.
2006 as JBT and total service as Assistant Professor College Cadre till date may be counted towards total length of service for all intents & Purpose with all consequential benefits. ” 3. According to the petitioner, the legal issue involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? petitioner is that his representation dated 26. 08. 2023 (Annexure P-7) has 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 petition is disposed of by directing respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge rd 23 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.