Himachal Pradesh High Court
Vinod Kumar Rana vs State Of H.P. And Others on 2 August, 2023
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3957 of 2023 Decided on: 2nd August, 2023
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Vinod Kumar Rana .....Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others .....Respondents
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner:
r to Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:-
"a) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents by way of issuance of Writ of Mandamus to consider the petitioner as having been appointed against the post of TGT (Non-Medical) pursuant to office order dated 26-11-2010 on regular basis for all intents and purpose and further this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the word 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2023 20:43:39 :::CIS 2
'contract' from the appointment letter, dated 26-11-2010 Annexure P-2 issued to the petitioner on contract basis in view of the judgment i.e. Annexure P-7 and P-8 passed by this Hon'ble Court.
b) This Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent State to pay .
to the petitioner all the emoluments as he is entitled as a regular employee in the establishment of respondents with interest of 18% w.e.f. petitioner's date of appointment with all consequential benefits including counting the period for the purpose of seniority etc."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment dated 19.12.2022 passed by this Court in CWP No.5090 of 2022 (Umesh Jaswal Versus State of H.P. & others and the connected matters). Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be content in case a direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner for redressal of his grievances raised in the writ petition in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule.
Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner for redressal of his grievances raised in the writ ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2023 20:43:39 :::CIS 3 petition, in accordance with law and taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Umesh Jaswal, supra, within a period of six weeks from today. The .
decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
August 02, 2023
Mukesh
r to Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge
::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2023 20:43:39 :::CIS