CHAMPA KUMARI AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS
Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Himachal Pradesh judgment dated 2024-12-24. CHAMPA KUMARI AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 16030 of 2024 and connected matters th Decided on: 24 December 2024 _________________________________________________________________ 1. CWP No. 16030 of 2024 Dinesh Kumari .... Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 2. CWP No. 16033 of 2024 Vijay Kumar and Anr. .... Petitioners Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 3. CWP No. 16035 of 2024 Sunil Kumar .... Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 4. CWP No. 16064 of 2024 Ashwani Kumar and Ors. .... Petitioners Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ - 2 - 5. CWP No. 16065 of 2024 Ravinder Kumar .... Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Ors.
…Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 6. CWP No. 16071 of 2024 Amit Kumar and Ors. .... Petitioners Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 7. CWP No. 16087 of 2024 Hari Krishan and Anr. .... Petitioners Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 8. CWP No. 16095 of 2024 Champa Kumari and Ors. .... Petitioners Versus State of H. P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner(s): Mr. Onkar Jairath and Mr. Anshul Jairath, Advocates in all the petitions. For the respondents: Mr. L. N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
- 3 - ________________________________________________________________ Sushil Kukreja, Judge (Oral) Notice. Mr. L. N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents in all the writ petitions. 2. These petitions have been filed for grant of following identical reliefs: - “i. That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue the Writ in the nature of mandamus, order or directions directing the Respondents to regularize the services of the Petitioners w. e. f. the date when the Petitioners have completed their two years' service on contract basis i. e.
from the date the Regularization Policy was liberalized, along with all consequential benefits, including the benefit of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised pay) Rules, 2022 and the petitioners be accorded the benefit of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised pay) Rules, 2022 after taking into account the services rendered by them on contract basis as having been appointed prior to 03. 01. 2022, as has been approved by the Cabinet on 14. 10. 2022. ii That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue the Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to extend the benefits of the Notifications dated 03. 01. 2022 & 06. 09. 2022 and Grant Higher Stage of Pay in the Concerned Level of Pay Matrix i. e. Rs. 30500/- as per Notification dated 06. 09. 2022 and fix their pay from due date i. e. after completion two years of regular service with all - 4 -consequential benefits including the arrears along with interest @ 9%. ” 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved and the reliefs prayed for by the petitioners have already been adjudicated Mohit Sharma and Anr. Vs. 2 State of H. P. and others . Learned counsel for the petitioners’ states that the petitioners would be content if the respective cases of the petitioners are considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgment within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the respective cases of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioners. CWP No. 1638 of 2024, decided on 29. 11. 2024.
- 5 - Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. (Sushil Kukreja) Judge December 24, 2024 Pardeep
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.