Himachal Pradesh High Court
Manoj Sharma And Others vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 8 October, 2018
Bench: Sanjay Karol, Chander Bhusan Barowalia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
.
CWP No.1721 of 2018
Date of decision : 08.10.2018
Manoj Sharma and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others
...Respondents
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia , Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
For the Petitioners : Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate .
For the Respondents : Ms. Rita Goswami, Mr.Vikas Rathore,
Addl. A.Gs., Mr. J.S. Guerlia and Ms.
Svaneel Jaswal, Dy. A.G s. for the
State.
Sanjay Karol, Judge (Oral)
Petitioners , by the medium of this petition, have mainly prayed for the following relief:-
"(i) Issuing a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to count the petitioner's service w.e.f. 28.08.2007, 29.09.2006 and 09.08.2005 respectively Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2018 22:57:48 :::HCHP
...2...
towards seniority for all intent and purpose.
.
(ii) Issuing a writ of mandamus for directing the respondents to release the grant in aid to the petitioner for w.e.f.
31.12.2008 to 13.10.2009, 31.12.2008 to 12.10.2009 and 31.12.2008 to 23.09.2009 respectively alongwith interest.
(iii) Issuing a writ of mandamus for
directing the respondents to
regularize/take on contract basis the services of the petitioner as PTA teacher at par and alongwith those whose services had been taken over after completion of seven years along with all consequential benefits by counting the period of w.e.f. 31.12.2008 to 13.10.2009, 31.12.2008 to 12.10.2009 and 31.12.2008 to 23.09.2009 respectively towards his service."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, under instructions, submits that the petitioners shall be content if a direction is issued to respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representation (s), ::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2018 22:57:48 :::HCHP ...3...
venting out their grievance, which they shall be making within a period of two weeks from today.
.
Also, petitioners do not press the issue raised in the present petition, for the reliefs as orally prayed for, is that of a mere direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representation(s) which they shall be making within a period of two weeks from today.
3.
r to Learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents has no objection to the same.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners invites our attention not only to several decisions rendered by this Court but the modified order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, whereby the decisions rendered by this Court, stand assailed. It is pointed out that the stand taken by the State is self contradictory and contrary to the settled principle of law.
5. Be that as it may, in view of the assurance given by the State that the petitioners ' representation shall be considered dispassionately based on the ::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2018 22:57:48 :::HCHP ...4...
material placed by the parties before the authority, we are in agreement with the learned counsel that the .
issue be first decided by the State itself.
6. No other point is urged.
7. Leaving all questions of law open, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel more so, for the reason that the petition, as prayed for is not pressed, we dispose of the present petition with direction to the respondents to cons ider and decide the petitioners' representation(s) expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks from the receipt thereof, in accordance with law, by affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned.
8. Needless to add, if the order is not in favour of the petitioners , the authority shall assign reasons while deciding the same, which shall be communicated to the petitioners . L iberty is reserved to the petitioners to approach the Court, if need so arises subsequently.
::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2018 22:57:48 :::HCHP...5...
9. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the .
authority shall consider and decide all issues, more so, in the light of the orders, which stand modified by the Hon'ble Apex Court and not only the stand taken by the State in response to the writ petition.
With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands application(s), if any.
Copy Dasti.
disposed of, so also pending
(Sanjay Karol),
Judge.
(Chander Bhusan Barowalia),
October 8, 2018 (KS) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2018 22:57:48 :::HCHP