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 1, Cited by 12]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sanjeev Kumar And Others vs State Of H.P. And Others on 1 April, 2015

Author: Tarlok Singh Chauhan

Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                              CWP No. 4531 of 2014.




                                                                          .

                                              Date of decision: 1st April, 2015.





    Sanjeev Kumar and others                                            .....Petitioners.
                         Versus

    State of H.P. and others                                        .....Respondents.

    Coram


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

    Whether approved for reporting?1No

    For the Petitioners              :        Mr. J. R. Sharma, Advocate.

    For the Respondents :                     Mr.    V.K.   Verma,   Additional
                                              Advocate General with Ms. Parul


                                              Negi, Dy. Advocate General.




    Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. (Oral).

The petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

"(i) That respondents may kindly be directed to grant the revised pay scale of Rs.10300-34800/- + Rs.3200/- as grade pay to the category of Laboratory Attendant with effect from 01.10.2012 with all consequential benefits and the arrears accrued to the petitioners may kindly be ordered to be paid with interest.
(ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to re-designate the category of Laboratory Attendant as Laboratory Assistant in the interest of justice."

2. Similar issues came up before this Court in a bunch of petitions, the lead case whereof is CWP No. 9519 of 2014, titled as Rakesh Kumar vs. State of H.P. and others, decided on 5th January, 2015 and after hearing the parties, the learned Division Bench has passed the following order:

"6. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we deem it proper to dispose of all these writ Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:55:53 :::HCHP 2 petitions with a command to the respondents to examine the cases of the writ petitioners in light of the averments .
contained in the writ petitions and make a decision within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.
7. It goes without saying that in case decision is made against the writ petitioners, they are at liberty to challenge the same.
8. The writ petitions are disposed of, as indicated hereinabove, alongwith all pending applications".

3. Since the issue in the instant petition is same, therefore, this petition is disposed of by commanding the respondents to examine the case of the petitioners in light of the averments contained in the writ petition and also taking into consideration the judgment passed by this Court in Rakesh Kumar's case (supra) and make a decision within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.

4. It goes without saying that in case decision goes against the petitioners, they are at liberty to challenge the same.

5. The writ petition is disposed of, as indicated hereinabove, alongwith all pending applications.

    April 1, 2015                                          (Tarlok Singh Chauhan),
    (GR)                                                           Judge.




                                                     ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:55:53 :::HCHP