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 0, Cited by 2]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

The State Of Himachal Pradesh vs Raj Kamal Verma on 18 February, 2022

Bench: M.R. Shah, B.V. Nagarathna

                                                             1

     ITEM NO.15                      Court 12 (Video Conferencing)                       SECTION XIV

                                     S U P R E M E C O U R T O F               I N D I A
                                             RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

               Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                      No(s).     2130/2022

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-08-2021
     in LPA No. 73/2021 passed by the High Court Of Himachal Pradesh At
     Shimla)

     THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.                                           Petitioner(s)

                                                           VERSUS

     RAJ KAMAL VERMA & ANR.                                                         Respondent(s)

     (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.19925/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

     Date : 18-02-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
                               HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

     For Petitioner(s)                     Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, AAG/AOR
                                           Mrs. Bihu Sharma, Adv.
                                           Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Adv.
                                           Mr. Akshay C. Shrivastava, Adv.
     For Respondent(s)

                                UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                   O R D E R

The stand which is taken by the State is too technical. It is not in dispute that the respondent No.1 was appointed along with others on 07.05.2003 and the appointment order prescribed 20 days time for joining. The original writ petitioner, accordingly, joined on 27.05.2003. Therefore, for the purpose of GPF, his services were required to be counted from the date of appointment i.e. 07.05.2003. The stand taken by the State that as the writ Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by R petitioner Natarajan Date: 2022.02.21 16:51:48 IST joined on 27.05.2003 and the cut-off date for the Reason: entitlement of GPF was 15.05.2003, they shall not be entitled to the benefit of GPF, as observed herein above, such a stand is too 2 technical. The High Court has rightly directed the State to give the benefit of GPF to the respondent No.1–original writ petitioner. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the High Court. In fact, the State ought not to have filed such a Special Leave Petition and burden this Court when the view taken by the High Court was a plausible view and, as such, can be said to be in furtherance of the GPF Scheme.

The Special Leave Petition stands dismissed with costs, which is quantified at Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand only) to be deposited with the State Legal Services Authority to be deposited within a period of four weeks from today.

Pending application stands disposed of.

(R. NATARAJAN)                                 (NISHA TRIPATHI)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                          BRANCH OFFICER