Disposed

Nagesh Thakur v. State Election Commission of Himachal Pradesh

Himachal Pradesh HC9 Dec 2024CWP/14931/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two writ petitions sought counting of contract-period service for seniority, pension, increments and earned leave with monetary benefits. Since the underlying legal issue was stated to be already adjudicated and the petitioners' representations were pending, the court directed the competent authority to decide the representations within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to decide petitioners' representations dated 02.09.2024 within six weeks and communicate decisions; pending miscellaneous applications disposed.

Nagesh Thakur Vs State Election… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 14918/2024 a/w connected matter Decided on: 09.12.2024

¶3

1. CWP No. 14918/2024

¶4

Sanjay Kumar …Petitioner Versus State Election Commission H.P. .…Respondent

¶5

2. CWP No. 14931/2024

¶6

Nagesh Thakur …Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Election Commission H.P. .…Respondent

¶9

Coram

¶10

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

¶11

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶12

For the petitioner(s): Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate.

¶13

For the respondent(s): Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, Advocate.

¶14

Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J

¶15

Notice. Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, learned counsel, accepts

¶16

notice on behalf of the respondent(s).

¶17

2 . The writ petitions have been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:-

¶18

“ a. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent department to count the services of petitioners rendered on contract basis for the purpose of seniority, pension, annual

¶19

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

¶20

¶21

increment and career scheme alongwith progression all other consequential benefits from the date of initial appointment on contract basis in the interest of justice.

¶22

b. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent department to count the service of petitioners rendered on contract basis for the purpose of earned leave from the date of initial appointment on contract basis in the interest of justice.

¶23

c. That the respondent herein may kindly be directed to release the entire consequential monetary benefits accrued in favour of petitioner since, from the day of initial appointment of the petitioner on contractual basis along with interest @12% per annum.”

¶24

3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue involved in

¶25

the cases has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the petitioners is that their respective representations dated 02.09.2024 (Annexure P-5) have still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority.

¶26

4. Once the legal principle involved in the adjudication of present petitions has already been decided, it is expected from the welfare State to consider and decide the representation of the aggrieved employee within a reasonable time and not to sit over the same indefinitely compelling the employee to come to the Court for redresssal of his grievances. This is also the purport and object of the Litigation Policy of the State. Not taking decision on the representation for months together would not only give rise to unnecessary multiplication of the litigation but would also bring in

¶27

¶28

otherwise avoidable increase to the Court docket on unproductive government induced litigation.

¶29

5 . In view of above, the instant petitions are disposed of by directing respondents/competent authority to consider and decide respective representations of the petitioners dated 02.09.2024 (Annexure P-5), in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶30

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶31

09^th December, 2024(rohit)

Nagesh Thakur v. State Election Commission of Himachal Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagesh Thakur v. State Election Commission of Himachal Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chaman Lal Vs State of Hp and Others

Chhotu Ram Vs State of Hp and Others

Karam Chand Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Dasoda Chauhan Vs State of Hp and Another

Urmila Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others

Kamla Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others