Disposed¶10

Soma Devi v. MD Hptdcl and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC20 Apr 2024CWP/824/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HP High Court Shimla; Soma Devi v. Managing Director HPTDC & another; CWP No. 824 of 2024; disposal without merits; direction to consider case in light of Anil Kumar Goel (CWP 6628/2021, DB, 24.2.2022) and Trilok Chand (CWP 9475/2023, 3.1.2024); six-month timeline; speaking order; parity/similarly situated employee benefits; HPTDC.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of at counsel's request: respondents (Managing Director, HPTDC & another) directed to consider the petitioner's case in light of CWP No. 6628 of 2021 (Anil Kumar Goel vs. HPTDC & another, 24.2.2022) and CWP No. 9475 of 2023 (Trilok Chand vs. HPTDC, 3.1.2024) within six months, decide by a speaking order, and grant the petitioner the same benefits if found similarly situated; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ¶10

Soma Devi Vs MD Hptdcl and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents shall consider the petitioner's case in a time bound manner in light of the judgments in CWP No. 6628 of 2021 (Anil Kumar Goel vs. HPTDC) and CWP No. 9475 of 2023 (Trilok Chand vs. HPTDC) and grant her the same benefits if found similarly situated.

¶9

Court's answer

The petition is disposed of without making any comments on the merits of the petitioner's case.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's case in light of the judgment in CWP No. 6628 of 2021 (Anil Kumar Goel vs. HPTDC & another) passed by the Division Bench and the judgment in CWP No. 9475 of 2023 (Trilok Chand vs. HPTDC) passed by a Coordinate Bench.

¶10

Key takeaways

The consideration of the petitioner's case shall be completed within six months and decided by passing a speaking order.ratio¶10
If the petitioner is found similarly situated to the petitioners in the referred judgments, she shall be granted the same benefits as were granted to those petitioners.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh (Shimla), CWP No. 824 of 2024, Soma Devi v. Managing Director, HPTDC & another — oral order dated 20.4.2024 of Justice Satyen Vaidya. On the petitioner's counsel submitting that her case was squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment in CWP No. 6628 of 2021 (Anil Kumar Goel vs. HPTDC & another, 24.2.2022) and the Coordinate Bench judgment in CWP No. 9475 of 2023 (Trilok Chand vs. HPTDC, 3.1.2024), the petition was disposed of without any comments on its merits. Respondents were directed to consider the petitioner's case in light of those two judgments within six months and decide it by a speaking order; if the petitioner is found similarly situated to the petitioners in those judgments, the same benefits are to be granted to her. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stood disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

	CWP No. 824 of 2024
	Date of decision : 20.4.2024.
Soma Devi	...Petitioner.
	Versus
Managing Director,	HPTDC & another ...Respondents.

¶3

Coram:

¶4

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge . Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the petitioner : Mr. Naresh Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Shivank Singh Panta, Advocate.

¶5

Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral):

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 6628 of 2021, titled as, Anil Kumar Goel vs. HPTDC & another on 24.2.2022 along with connected matters and the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 9475 of 2023, titled as, Trilok Chand vs. HPTDC, on 3.1.2024 along with connected matters. He further submits that petitioner shall be content in case the respondents are directed to

¶7

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

¶8

-2-

¶9

consider the case of the petitioner in a time bound manner in light of judgments ibid .

¶10

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of without making any comments on the merits of the case of the petitioner. It is directed that respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 6628 of 2021, titled as, Anil Kumar Goel vs. HPTDC & another on 24.2.2022 along with connected matters and the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 9475 of 2023, titled as, Trilok Chand vs. HPTDC, on 3.1.2024 along with connected matters, within six months from today and will decide the same by passing a speaking order. In case, the petitioner is found similarly situated as petitioners in the above mentioned judgments, she will also be granted the same benefits as granted to petitioners in above referred cases. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶11

20^th April, 2024 (kck)

¶12

(Satyen Vaidya) Judge

Soma Devi v. MD Hptdcl and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soma Devi v. MD Hptdcl and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajinder Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Lekh Ram Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Rajinder Singha Vs Hrtc and Anr.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Kundan Singh Vs Hrtc and Others

Sunder Singh Vs State of Hp and Ors.