Disposed

Kewal Verma v. Hrtc and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC1 Dec 2023CWP/8159/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh disposed of a writ petition seeking regularization of the petitioner's services under the kith and kin policy. The Court noted that the petitioner had already been granted regularization with retrospective effect via an order dated 14.11.2023. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition, restricting consequential benefits to three years.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and pending miscellaneous applications were disposed of by regularizing services via office order dated 14.11.2023 with consequential benefits restricted to three years.

Kewal Verma Vs Hrtc and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.8159 of 2023

¶3

Decided on: 1^st December, 2023

Kewal Verma

....Petitioner

Versus

Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another

¶8

……Respondents

¶9

Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

¶10

1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes

¶11

For the petitioner: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, Advocate.

¶12

Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)

¶13

Notice. Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, learned Standing Counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents.

¶14

2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal, at this stage.

¶15

3. The petitioner, a Conductor in the RespondentCorporation has filed the instant writ petition, seeking the following reliefs:-

¶16

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶17

¶18

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent authorities to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment i.e. w.e.f 8.8.2008 with all consequential benefits under the kith and kin policy as has been done with similarly situated incumbents in compliance to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court i.e. Annexure P-4.”

¶19

(ii) That the respondents may further be directed to pay arrears alongwith interest @ 9% w.e.f. 08.08.2008 from the date his services are entitled to be regularized.”

¶20

4. The petitioner, was appointed as a Conductor, in the Respondent-Corporation, on contract basis, under the kith and kin policy on 08.08.2008 and his services were regularized by the Corporation w.e.f. 09.07.2015. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is entitled for regular appointment w.e.f. 08.08.2008 (instead of 09.07.2015, but was wrongly given contractual appointment on 08.08.2008), in view of the judgment passed by this Court against which the Respondent-Corporation has filed Civil Appeal No.1557-1564 of 2019, titled as Himachal

¶21

Road Transport Corporation versus Lekh Ram etc. etc.,

¶22

¶23

decided on 08.02.2019, Annexure P-4.

¶24

5. Based on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Lekh Ram (supra), the petitioner contended that the benefit of regular appointment from the date of initial contractual appointment has been granted to other similarly placed employees, who were appointed on compassionate grounds/kith and kin policy given by the RespondentCorporation.

¶25

6. Today the case was listed for first hearing and Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, learned counsel, has placed on record the office order dated 14.11.2023, [ taken on record ] whereby, the petitioner has been granted the benefit of regularization of services w.e.f 08.08.2008, instead of contractual employment which was granted earlier under the kith and kin policy. Mr. Dheeraj Vashisht, learned counsel, submits that in the order dated 14.11.2023, the directions have been given to the concerned officials to grant the benefit of seniority and terminal benefits due date, i.e. 08.08.2008 to the petitioner. He further submits that the directions to release the arrears payable as per law on account of retrospective regular appointment w.e.f. 08.08.2008 have also been given. In view of this, he submits the reliefs have been given and the case may be closed.

¶26

¶27

7. Accordingly, since the substantive reliefs have already been granted, therefore, the consequential benefits of pay fixation and arrears accruing therefrom shall be regulated/restricted for a period of three years only, prior to the filing of the instant writ petition on (08.09.2023), if any, in terms of the mandate of law in case of Union of India versus Tarsem Singh (2008) 8 SCC 648; Shiv Dass versus Union of India and Others; (2007) 9 SCC 274; State of Madhya Pradesh and Others versus Yogendra Shrivastava (2010) 12 SCC 538 and Asger Ibrahim Amin Versus Life Insurance Corporation of India (2016) 13 SCC 797, followed in Rushibhai Jagdishchandra Pathak versus Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation CA No.4134 of 2022 [2022 SCC Online S C 641] decided on 18.5.2022.

¶28

8. In the aforesaid terms, the instant writ petition, as well as, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of, accordingly.

¶29

Judge

¶30

(Bhardwaj)

¶31

December 01, 2023

Kewal Verma v. Hrtc and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kewal Verma v. Hrtc and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhaskar Ram Vs State of Hp

Rattni Devi Vs Shrikant Baldi

Chet Ram Vs Srikant Baldi

Narender Singh and Anr. Vs Hrtc and Anr.

Sain Dass Vs State of Hp and Others

Saroj Rani Vs the State of Hp and Others