Disposed

Chander Verma and Others v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC10 Dec 2024CWP/456/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contract employee writ petition, the High Court directed the respondents to release monetary benefits within eight weeks. The benefits were restricted to a three-year period preceding the petition filing. The court noted that survival of the case depends on pending Supreme Court appeals.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to release relevant monetary benefits within eight weeks, subject to pending appeals, with benefits calculated from three years prior to the filing date.

Chander Verma and Others Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.456 of 2024 Date of decision: 10.12.2024

¶3

Chander Verma & Ors. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. ...Respondent. Coram:

¶4

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge . Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate with Ms. Rajni Gandhi, Advocate. For the respondent : Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General.

¶5

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶6

This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief(s):-

¶7

“i). That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ of mandamus whereby, the respondents may kindly be directed to count the period of contractual service rendered by the petitioners for the purpose of seniority, pay, allowances, leave encashment, promotion, pension and other consequential benefits etc. in the light of judgment passed in Taj Mohammad case as well as in Civil Writ Petition No. 5043 of 2022 titled as Sunita Sangroli Vs. state of Himachal Pradesh.

¶8

b. That the respondents herein may kindly be directed to release the entire consequential monetary benefits accrued in favour of petitioners since, from the day of initial appointment of the petitioners on contractual basis in the light of judgment passed in CWPOA No. 3929 of 2020 titled as Dr. Shweta Sharma & Others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh Vide Annexure P/4.”

¶9

1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

¶10

-2-

¶11

Respondents along with their reply placed on

¶12

record an order dated 22.08.2024 (Annexure R-I), deciding the case of the petitioners. As per this order, petitioners’ request was allowed on the analogy of decision rendered in Dr. Ranjeet Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors.¹ . As per the order dated 22.08.2024, Dr. Ranjeet Singh’s case¹ has been decided by the respondents vide notification dated 22.05.2024.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the order dated 22.08.2024 did not fix any timeline for giving the benefits to the petitioners.

¶14

During the course of hearing today, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record another order passed by the respondents on 09.12.2024, operative part of which goes as under:-

¶15

“Now therefore, the monetary benefits in favour of the Petitioner(s) are restricted to three years prior to date of filing of the Writ Petition by the Petitioner(s), in terms of the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Finance Department letter No. Fin(PR)-B(7)16/98-III(Agriculture) dated 15.12.2011 and in supersession of this Department Order No. EDN-AChha(5)5/2023-Loose-I dated 22.08.2024. This order shall be subject to the final outcome of the decision in the SLPs being filed/filed by the concerned departments) in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and/or any other efficacious legal remedy available

¶16

1CWPOA No.3282 of 2019 decided on 24.11.2023 (H.P. High Court)

¶17

-3-

¶18

to this Department. All the concerned to ensure further necessary action in above terms.”

¶19

Learned Deputy Advocate General on the basis of instructions imparted to her submits that benefits, in terms of order dated 09.12.2024 passed by respondents, shall be released in favour of the petitioners within eight weeks from today.

¶20

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of. Respondents to do the needful as per above timeline. It is for the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy, as may be available to them in law, for redressal of their surviving grievances, if any.

¶21

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also to stand disposed of.

¶22

10^th December, 2024

¶23

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶24

(Pardeep)

Chander Verma and Others v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chander Verma and Others v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arvind Singh Guleria Vs State of Hp and Others

Sher Singh Vs Rohan Chand Thakur

Jagat Kishore Vs Rohan Chand Thakur

Brij Lal Vs Hrtc and Another

Kailash Chand Vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Others

Ami Chand Vs Rakesh Kanwar and Others