Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Kushal Kumar vs The Deputy Commissioner­Cum­ on 10 October, 2023

Author: Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                      CWP No.6644 of 2022
                                                      Decided on: 10.10.2022




                                                                           .

    Kushal Kumar                                                       ....Petitioner.
               Versus





    The Deputy Commissioner­cum­
    Chariman Temple Trust, Mata
    Shri Chintpurni Ji, Una & another                                 .... Respondents.




                                                 of
    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1

    For the petitioner
                         rt          :       Mr. Anand Sharma, Senior Advocate,
                                             with Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate.

    For the Respondents               :      Mr.     Pushpinder    Jaswal,
                                             Additional Advocate General, with
                                             Mr.    Sumit   Sharma,     Deputy
                                             Advocate General and Mr. Rajat


                                             Chauhan, Law Officer, for respondent
                                             ­State.

    Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:­ "(1) That the respondents may kindly be directed to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme of Government Servants by issuing a Writ of mandamus in the interest of justice.

1

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2023 20:35:45 :::CIS 2

(2) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to decide the employment application/ representation of the petitioner Annexure P­3 in a time bound manner."

.

2. Despite opportunity having been granted, reply to the petition not filed.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that at this stage interest of justice would be served in of case respondents are directed to take a decision on the representation filed by the petitioner seeking employment on rt compassionate basis as expeditiously as possible. Learned Senior Counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure P­4 appended with the petition and submitted that despite the matter having been forwarded by the Temple Authorities to the respondent­State, as nothing has been done till date, therefore, the respondents be directed to take a devision on the representation within some reasonable time.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the decision on the representation of the petitioner seeking appointment on compassionate basis in accordance with law shall be taken within a period of eight weeks from today. His statement is taken on record.

::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2023 20:35:45 :::CIS 3

5. The petition is disposed of accordingly. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge October 10, 2023 (Rishi) of rt ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2023 20:35:45 :::CIS