Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 14]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

State Of Himachal Pradesh And Another vs Nisha Kumari And Others on 21 July, 2023

Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Satyen Vaidya

                                                    1




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                              CMP(M) No.406 of 2023 and
                                              LPA No.117 of 2023




                                                                                .
                                              Date of Decision : 21st July, 2023





    State of Himachal Pradesh and another

                                                                         ...... Appellants





                                     Versus

    Nisha Kumari and others

                                                                         ......Respondents

    Coram:


    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge

    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge

                                     1
    Whether approved for reporting? No


    For the Appellants             : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with
                                     Mr. I.N. Mehta, Senior Additional Advocate


                                     General, Mr. Ramakant Sharma & Ms. Sharmila
                                     Patiyal,    Additional Advocates General,
                                     Ms. Priyanka      Chauhan, Deputy Advocate
                                     General and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer.




    For the Respondents : Ms. Anjali Soni Verma, Advocate.






    Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (oral)
CMP(M) No.406 of 2023

For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit of the Director Health Services, Himachal Pradesh, we find sufficient cause to condone the delay of 79 days that has crept up 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2023 20:37:15 :::CIS 2

in filing the appeal. Ordered accordingly. The application stands disposed of.

The appeal be registered.

.

LPA No.117 of 2023

We really fail to understand, as to why the State has filed the instant appeal. It had been argued before the learned writ Court that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal in T.A. No.4478 of 2015, case titled Parwati Sharma and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and another, decided on 11.1.2018, wherein the respondent-

State was directed to consider the case of the petitioners therein for regularization of their services from the date they were appointed on contract basis notionally. The State was further directed to release the actual financial benefits to the petitioners from the date of their regularization. This order was assailed by the State by filing writ petition before this Court, being CWP No.5764 of 2020, titled State of HP and another vs. Parwati Sharma and others, decided on 6.1.2021 and the same was dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. Thereafter, the State preferred an SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, the same was also dismissed.

2. This position was conceded by the State, as is evident from Paragraph-4 of the judgment which reads as under:-

"4. Learned Senior Additional Advocate General could not deny the factum of the relief having been ::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2023 20:37:15 :::CIS 3 granted in favour of the persons similarly situated as the petitioners in T.A. No.4478 of 2015, which has attained finality."

3. It is in this background that the learned writ Court held that the .

writ petition filed by the respondents was fully covered by the judgment rendered by the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal in Parvati Sharma's case and issued consequential directions to the appellants to regularize the services of the respondents from the date they were appointed on contract basis notionally and thereafter grant the actual benefits to the respondents from the date of their regularization.

4. As it would be evident from the aforesaid discussions that the judgment rendered by the learned writ Court was based upon the concession given by the appellants themselves, therefore, in such circumstances, the appellants are clearly estopped from assailing the order passed by the learned writ Court.

5. Consequently, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.

6. Though, this was a fit case where heavy costs ought to have been imposed, but taking into account the persuasive submissions made by learned Advocate General, we refrain ourselves from passing such orders. However, we make it clear that in case any such kind of frivolous petitions, reviews or appeals are filed in future, the Court may not be so magnanimous and would not hesitate from imposing heavy costs.

::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2023 20:37:15 :::CIS 4

7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

.


                                           ( Tarlok Singh Chauhan )
                                                    Judge





                                               ( Satyen Vaidya)
    [                                                Judge
    July 21, 2023 (KS)



                      r        to









                                            ::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2023 20:37:15 :::CIS