Ramnesh Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.

“a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus 'or' new any other appropriate writ order 'or' direction may be issued thereby directing the respondents to grant/release the 3rd financial enhancement/up-gradation under the ACPS(4-914) on completion of their 14 years of service on the same post alongwith all consequential benefits, to the

¶16

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

¶17

-2-

¶18

petitioners, in the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of H.P and ors. a/w connected matters decided on 01.11.2023(Annexure P-2), which stands implemented on 12.06.2024 (Annexure P-3), in the interest of law and justice.

¶19

b) That the respondents may be directed to release the interest @ 9% per annum upon the arrears after granting relief no. (a) supra, in the interest of law and justice. c) That during the pendency of the writ petition the respondents may directed to consider and decide the representation dated 03.08.2025 (Annexure P-4), in view of the judgment passed in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar vs. State of H.P. & Ors. a/w connected matters decided on 01.11.2023 (Annexure P-2) which stands implemented on 12.06.2024 (Annexure P-3), in the interest of law and justice.”

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted

¶21

that the issue arising in the instant petition has already been settled by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 01.11.2023 passed in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020 titled as Sanjay Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others along with connected matters. He submits that the petitioners have already made a representation to the competent authority and he will be satisfied, at this stage, in case the competent authority i.e. respondent No.2 is directed to

¶22

-3-

¶23

decide the representation of the petitioners in a time bound manner, in terms of judgment in Sanjay Kumar (supra).

¶24

The prayer being innocuous is allowed. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners Annexure P-4 within a period of eight weeks from today by passing a detailed and reasoned order, strictly in terms of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020 titled as Sanjay Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others along with connected matters. Needless to say, in case the petitioners are found similarly situated to the petitioner in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, they shall be given all the benefits as have been granted to the petitioner in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020 within a further period of four weeks.

¶25

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending applications, if any.

¶26

(Satyen Vaidya) 26^th August, 2024 Judge (kck)

Ramnesh Kumar and Ors. v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramnesh Kumar and Ors. 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mansa Ram Vs H.P.T.D.C. and Ors.

Rajneesh Kumari Vs State of Hp

Nirmla Devi and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Beena Devi and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Puran Chand and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Kashmir Singh Vs the State of Hp and Others