Allowed

Ajay Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC9 Aug 2021CWP/4401/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a writ petition seeking quashing of an order denying registration of petitioners as Para Veterinary Practitioners. The court directed respondents to register the petitioners and process them for employment as Veterinary Pharmacists in Animal Husbandry Department within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of order dated 17.12.2016; direction to register petitioners and process for employment as Veterinary Pharmacists within four weeks.

Ajay Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Hp… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. ON THE 9^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

¶4

¶5

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA

¶6

CWP No. 4401 of 2021

¶7

Between :-

¶8

1. AJAY KUMAR, S/O SH. OM CHAND VERMA, R/O VILLAGE MATLAG, P.O. MASERAN, TEHSIL SARKAGHAT, DISTRICT MANDI, HIMAHCAL PRADESH.

¶9

2. SHALINI SHARMA, D/O SH. OM PARKASH SHARMA, R/O VILLAGE TRAMBLI, P.O. BARI, TEHSIL & DISTRICT KULLU, HIMACHAL PRADESH. (BY MAAN SINGH, ADVOCATE) AND

¶10

…..PETITIONERS

¶11

1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH SECRETARY (ANIMAL HUSBANDRY) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-2

¶12

2. HIMACHAL PRADESH PARA VETRINARY COUNCIL PASHUDHAN, BHAWAN, SHIMLA-5, THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR.

¶13

¶14

3. MANAV BHARTI UNIVERSITY, LADDO, POST OFFICE SULTANPUR, KUMARHATTI, DISTRICT SOLAN, HIMACHAL PRADESH, THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SH. RAJENDER DOGRA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL, WITH SH. SHIV PAL MANHANS, SH. HEMANSHU MISRA, ADDL. A.G., AND SH. BHUPINDER THAKUR, DY. A.G)

¶17

¶18

This petition coming on for orders this day Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, passed the following:-

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The instant petition has been filed for the

¶21

grant of following substantive reliefs:-

¶22

i) That the order dated 17.12.2016, annexure P-4, passed by the respondent No. 1 may very kindly be quashed and set aside to the extent, one time relaxation has been denied to the petitioners for getting themselves registered with the Para Veterinary Council and from seeking employment as Veterinary Pharmacist in Animal Husbandry Department .

¶23

ii) That the respondents No. 1 and 2 may very kindly be directed to register the names of petitioners as Para Veterinary Practitioners

¶24

¶25

under sub-Section 2 of Section 38 of Para Veterinary Council Act, 2010 and issue necessary certificates of registration on the analogy of case of petitioners in CWP No. 2695 of 2018/2843 of 2020, titled Manoj Kumar and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others.

¶26

2 . The parties are at ad idem that the issue in question is squarely covered by a judgment rendered by Principal Division Bench in CWP No. 2695 of 2018, titled Manoj Kumar & others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others, decided on 19.11.2019.

¶27

Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in the said petition, which shall apply mutatis mutandis to the instant writ petition, this writ petition is allowed. Consequently, impugned order dated 17.12.2016 (Annexure P-4), passed by respondent No. 1 is quashed and set aside. Respondent No. 1/State is directed to consider the case of the petitioners and pass orders afresh for the purpose of registering them with Himachal Pradesh Para Veterinary Council and for their employment as

¶28

¶29

Veterinary Pharmacist in Animal Husbandry Department, in light of the observations already made in the judgment rendered in Manoj Kumar’s case (supra) and in light of the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 8627 of 2010, titled Manav Bharti University vs. State of H.P. & others, decided on 13.04.2011, within a period of four weeks from today. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any.

¶30

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge

¶31

(Satyen Vaidya) Judge

¶32

August 09, 2021

¶33

(tarun/ravinder)

Ajay Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indu Bala Vs State of Hp and Another

Jagat Ram Sharma Vs State of Hp and Others

Satinder Singh Vs State of Hp and Anr.

Hem Lata Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Manju Bala Vs Hp State Agriculture Produce Marketing Board and Anr.

Om Parkash Vs Hpseb Ltd. and Anr.