Rakesh Kumari Vs State of Hp and Ors.

2024:HHC:5632

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 7041 of 2024 Decided on 15^th October, 2024 Rakesh Kumari …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram

¶3

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

¶4

For the petitioner: Mr. Jai Dev Thakur. For the respondents: Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General.

¶5

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral )

¶6

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter

¶7

alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶8

(i) “That the writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to count the entire contractual service of the husband of the petitioner as Shastri (OT) with effect from 9.11.2000 to 17.1.2010 for the purpose of qualifying service for pensionary benefits, seniority and annual increments under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and released to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 2011.

¶9

(ii) That the writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to re-fix the pay of the husband of the petitioner by giving them all annual increments for the contractual service as Shastri (OT) with effect from 9.11.2000 to 17.1.2010 and arrears of pay may also be paid to the petitioner alongwith upto date interest.

¶10

2

¶11

2024:HHC:5632

¶12

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the

¶13

present petition are that the late husband of the petitioner was appointed on special contractual basis against a sanctioned post of Shastri on 31.10.2000. His services were regularized as a regular C&V Teacher (OT) w.e.f. 18.01.2010. The husband of the petitioner died in harness on 26.09.2015. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer that the service rendered by her late husband on contract basis, followed by regularization, till the date of his death be counted for the purpose of annual increments and pensionary benefits.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the prayers being made by the petitioner are no more res-integra and the same are squarely covered by the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No.10399 of 2020, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh and another versus Sheela Devi, decided on 07.08.2023 and CWP No.2411 of 2019, titled as Jagdish Chand versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 10.01.2020.

¶15

3

¶16

2024:HHC:5632

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶18

learned Additional Advocate General.

¶19

Perusal of the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in State of Himachal Pradesh and another versus Sheela Devi demonstrates that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said judgment has been pleased to hold that the past service of a contractual employee is to be taken into account only for the purpose of pension. It is pertinent to mention that Sheela Devi had also approached this Court praying for counting of the service rendered by her late husband on contract basis followed by regularization for the purpose of pensionary benefits. Similarly, in Jagdish Chand versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court has been pleased to hold that the contractual service rendered by an employee followed by regularization has to be counted for the purpose of pension as well as annual increments. The judgment of Hon’ble Division Bench in Jagdish Chand versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others has attained finality as the SLP filed by the State against the said judgment before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was withdrawn by the State. This is not in dispute.

¶20

4

¶21

2024:HHC:5632

¶22

Though, learned Additional Advocate opposed the prayers of the petitioner, but he could not dispute the fact that these prayers in fact are squarely covered by the judgments being relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

Accordingly, as the issue raised in the petition is no more res-integra, this writ petition is allowed and it is ordered that the contractual service rendered by the late husband of the petitioner w.e.f. 09.11.2000 to 17.01.2010 be counted for the purpose of pensionary benefits as well as annual increments with all consequential benefits. However, said benefits will be notional as upto three years from the date of the filing of the writ petition where after the petitioner shall be entitled for actual monetary benefit. Needful done within a period of six weeks. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶24

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶25

October 15, 2024 (Vinod)

¶26

Digitally signed by BHUPENDER KUMAR DN: C=IN, O=HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, OU=HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL BHUPEND PRADESH SHIMLA, Phone=04d8bcd7412dcb18b7b081df02fb3b89ecc 4a0c8f8a66ab97285dc56e62d41fe, ER PostalCode=171001, S=Himachal Pradesh, SERIALNUMBER=2ccc91b5122501da0ce3678b0e2b7bd5fa9b09937769da5501e1f4e7ad448bc5, CN=BHUPENDER KUMAR Reason: I am approving this document with my KUMAR legally binding signatureLocation: Date: 2024-10-17 19:48:10

Rakesh Kumari v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumari v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritesh Verma and Others Vs State of Hp and Another

Monika Banyal and Others Vs Rakesh Kanwar and Another

Suman Chauhan and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Kala Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

Manju Sharma Vs Kushal Kumar Sharma

Chander Parkash Vs Sita Ram