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

Laxmi Nand Sharma vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 11 May, 2023

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 3480/2021 Decided on: 11.05.2023 .

Laxmi Nand Sharma ....Petitioner.

Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ......Respondent ............................................................................................. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner For the respondents r :

:
toMr. Neel Kamal Sood, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Seema, Advocate.
                                             Ms.   Seema     Sharma,
                                             Advocate General.
                                                                                        Deputy

    Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was to retire at the age of 60 years, however, the respondents retired him at the age of 58 years. Learned counsel further submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed in CWP No.2711/2017 (Baldev Vs. State of H.P. & Ors) decided on 22.02.2022. That the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in this petition would flow to him in terms of the judgment passed in Baldev's case (supra). Learned counsel also submitted that the petitioner would be content, in case, respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to examine and decide the case of the petitioner 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 11/05/2023 20:42:27 :::CIS 2

afresh, in light of the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment, in a time bound manner.

.

Prayer is not opposed by learned Deputy Advocate General.

2. In view of the stand taken by learned counsel for the parties, but without going into the merits of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner afresh, notwithstanding the impugned order dated 21.07.2018 (Annexure P-3), in accordance with law and in light of the aforesaid judgment within a period of six weeks by passing a reasoned order, which shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(Jyotsna Rewal Dua) Judge 11th May 2023 (Rohit) ::: Downloaded on - 11/05/2023 20:42:27 :::CIS