Disposed

Jiya Lal v. Hrtc and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC13 Mar 2024CWP/1622/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent corporation to consider and decide the petitioner's service-related claims regarding gratuity, leave encashment, GPF, and pension within eight weeks, aligning with the principles laid down in CWP No. 3050 of 2014.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent corporation to consider and decide petitioner's case within eight weeks in terms of CWP No. 3050 of 2014.

Jiya Lal Vs Hrtc and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 1622 of 2024.

¶3

Date of Decision : 13th March, 2024.

¶4

Jiya Lal ...Petitioner. Versus HRTC & Anr. ... .Respondents.

¶5

Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the Petitioner: Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate, vice Mr. Vinod K. Gupta, Advocate.

¶8

Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral).

¶9

The instant petition has been filed for the following substantive reliefs:-

¶10

“i) That the directions may kindly be issued to the respondent corporation to pay the amount of Gratuity (DCRG) amounting to Rs.13,01.223/and leave encashment amounting to Rs.9,00,000/- along with interest @9% per annum to the petitioner w.e.f. due date i.e. 01.03.2023 till the date of its realization, keeping in view the judgment passed by the

¶11

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

¶12

…2…

¶13

Hon'ble High Court in CWP No. 3050 of 2014, titled as Nek Ram versus State of H.P. and other, Annexure P-2.

¶14

ii) That the directions may also be issued to the respondent corporation to pay the interest @9% per annum on the amount of GPF, pension commutation and arrears of pension from the due date and till the date of its realization, to the petitioner.”

¶15

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶16

has submitted that the subject matter of instant petition is squarely covered by a judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 17^th July, 2014, in CWP No.3050 of 2014, titled

¶17

as Nek Ram vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

¶18

He submits that the petitioner in the instant petition shall be satisfied, at this stage, in case time bound directions are issued to respondent-corporation to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 3050 of 2014.

¶19

Prayer being innocuous is not opposed. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with direction to respondent-

¶20

…3…

¶21

Corporation to consider and decide the case of the petitioner within eight weeks from today strictly in terms of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court on on 17^th July, 2014, in CWP No.3050 of 2014, titled as Nek Ram vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., by passing a detailed and reasoned order. Needless to say that in case the petitioner is found entitled to the benefits of aforesaid judgment, he shall be granted all similar benefits as have been granted to the beneficiary of judgment passed in CWP No.3050 of 2014 within six weeks thereafter. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶22

13^th March, 2024 (jai)

¶23

(Satyen Vaidya) Judge

Jiya Lal v. Hrtc and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jiya Lal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Rajpaul Sharma Vs State of Hp and Others

Hitesh Vs State of Hp and Another

Brij Mohan Vs State of Hp and Others

Durga Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

State of Hp and Others Vs Jia Lal Mantan