Interim application in a pending writ petition challenging a penalty order sought time-bound release of leave encashment. The court held the relief sought was alien to the reliefs in the main writ petition and dismissed the application as misconceived; the main petition remains pending.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Shyam Lal vs. State of H.P. and others
CWP No. 10785 of 2023
19.07.2024 Present: Mr. P.K. Verma, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Addl. AG for respondents-State.
CMP No. 10846 of 2024
By way of main writ petition, the petitioner has
primarily prayed for the following reliefs:-
i) That the writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed and the impugned order 19.10.2023 contained in Annexure P-7 may kindly be quashed and set aside.
ii) That the order of penalty dated 22.07.2023 Annexure P-5 may kindly be quashed and set aside.
However, in terms of the present application, a relief has been sought that the respondent-Department be directed to release the amount of leave encashment in a time bound manner. The interim relief being sought is completely alien to the controversy and reliefs prayed for in the main writ petition, accordingly, this application being misconceived is dismissed.
July 19, 2024 (narender)
Shyam Lal
State of H.P.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
