Writ petition seeking higher pay scale from initial date of joining was disposed of on the basis of prior judgments in Madan Lal and Prem Sukh. The Court directed respondents to consider the petitioner's case in light of those judgments within eight weeks by a speaking order and to grant similar benefits if he is found similarly situated.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 3630 of 2024
Decided on: 02.05.2024
Tej Ram. .…Petitioner. Versus State of HP. and Ors. …Respondents. Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Y.P.D. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral)
The instant petition has been filed for the
following substantive relief:-
“That the respondents may very kindly be directed to grant the pay scale of Rs. 10830-3600 instead of pay scale of Rs. 10300-3200 w.e.f. initial date of joining of the petitioner on 30.01.2009 alongwith interest and with all consequential benefits and the
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
arrears may kindly be ordered to be paid with interest, in the interest of justice.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgments passed by this Court in CWP No. 3341 of 2019, titled as Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & Ors and CWPOA No. 6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & Ors. He further submits that petitioner shall be content in case the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in a time bound manner in the light of judgments ibid.
3
In case petitioner is found similarly situated as petitioners in. CWP No. 3341 of 2019, titled as Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & Ors and CWPOA No. 6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & Ors., he will also be granted the same benefits as granted to petitioners in above referred cases. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Satyen Vaidya) 2nd May, 2024 Judge (sushma)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted pay scale of Rs. 10830-3600 instead of Rs. 10300-3200 from date of joining with consequential benefits.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & OrsRelied on¶3
CWP No. 3341 of 2019, titled as Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & Ors
Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & OrsRelied on¶3
CWPOA No. 6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & Ors
Tej Ram
State of HP
Ors.
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
