Allowed

Ramesh Chand v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC18 Nov 2024CWP/3403/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed respondents to count the petitioner's contract service from 2009 to 2015 for pension and increments based on a Division Bench judgment. Arrears were restricted to three years from the petition filing date.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to count petitioner's contract service for pension and increments; restricting arrears to three years from the date of filing.

Ramesh Chand Vs State of Hp and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 3403 of 2024 Decided on 18^th November, 2024 Ramesh Chand …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents

¶3

Coram

¶4

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?

¶5

For the petitioner: Mr. Radhey Shyam Gautam, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General.

¶6

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral )

¶7

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has,

¶8

inter-alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶9

i) “That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to count the entire period of service rendered by the petitioner on contract basis as Fireman w.e.f. 17.12.2009 to 06.08.2015 for the purpose of pension under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, annual increments, calculating gratuity, leave encashment etc.

¶10

ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to pay pension to the petitioner w.e.f. 01.12.2020 and allow the benefit of increments for the contract period of service and further pay the revised gratuity, leave encashment, commuted value of pension counting the period from 17.12.2009 alongwith arrears thereof with arrears thereof with interest @ 9% per annum from the due date till actual payment.”

¶11

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.338 of 2024 titled Narayan Dutt Sharma versus State of Himachal Pradesh and other, decided on 12.11.2024 and submitted that the relief being prayed for by the petitioner is squarely covered by the said judgment.

¶13

Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has prayed for the counting of the contract service rendered by him before his regularization for the purposes of pension and annual increments, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the service rendered by the petitioner on contractual basis shall be taken into consideration as qualifying serving for the purpose of pension and also annual increments, in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Division Bench being relied upon by the petitioner. However, the arrears will be restricted three years as from the date of the filing of this writ petition. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶14

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶15

November 18, 2024 (Vinod)

Ramesh Chand v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chand v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harmesh Chand Vs State of Hp and Others

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Mohinder Singh Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Balak Ram Vs the State of Hp and Others