Himachal Pradesh High Court
Inder Singh (Rtd. Beldar) vs The State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors on 20 September, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3749 of 2023 Date of Decision: 20.9.2023 .
_______________________________________________________ Inder Singh (Rtd. Beldar) .......Petitioner Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. ... Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 of For the Petitioner: Mr. H.S.Rangra, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Yash Pal Dhaulta and Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate Generals with rt Ms. Seema Sharma, Mr. Sumeet Sharma, Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate Generals and Mr. Rajat Sharma, Law Officer, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main relief:-
"(i) That recovery order as Annexed as P-2 may kindly be set aside being ultra virus, illegal and arbitrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and respondents be directed to release the whole amount of leave encashment alongwith the interest @ 9% from 1.2.2019 to till its realization as per the latest law of Apex Court held in State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Mohd and followed by this Hon'ble Apex Court in CWPOA No.3145 of 2019."
2. Though, reply on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 stands filed, but before the case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merits, learned counsel representing the petitioner states that 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2023 20:35:19 :::CIS 2petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 20th September 2022, passed by Division .
Bench of this Court in CWP No.3686 of 2022, titled Suraj Singh (Rtd. Jr. Eng) vs. The Secretary ( I& PH), Government of Himachal Pradesh and others, in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondents-State is of not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.
3. rt Having perused the averments contained in the petition as well as relief prayed therein vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.3686 of 2022 and as such, no prejudice, if any, would be caused to either of the parties, if the respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment supra.
4. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 20th September 2022, passed in Suraj Singh case (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2023 20:35:19 :::CIS 3 concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the .
petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma), of Judge September 20, 2023 (shankar) rt ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2023 20:35:19 :::CIS