Disposed¶28

Shakuntla v. State of Hp and Anr.

Himachal Pradesh HC7 May 2025CWP/6634/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pay scale fixation; UGC scales; Senior Selection Grade; AGP 9000; pay band Rs.37400-67000 w.e.f. 01.01.2006; parity with similarly situated employees; Laiq Ram Sharma; Kartar Chand; notification dated 15.10.2009 Higher Education Department H.P.; time-bound direction to consider case; disposed of without examining merits; Himachal Pradesh High Court; CWP No.6634 of 2021; decided 07.05.2025; Jyotsna Rewal Dua.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider the petitioner's case in light of the aforesaid judgments (Laiq Ram Sharma, CWP No.7526 of 2021, and the LPA affirming it) and pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law within four weeks from receipt of copy of the order; the decision to be communicated to the petitioner. No monetary relief awarded by this Court. ¶28

Shakuntla Vs State of Hp and Anr. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to grant/release of the pay scale of Rs.37000-67000+9000 (AGP) after a period of 3 years from the grant of Senior Selection Grade, with arrears and interest @ 18% per annum, on parity with similarly situated persons (Sh Sant Ram Chauhan and Sh Laiq Ram Chauhan).

¶11

Court's answer

Without examining the merits of the matter, the petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's case in light of the judgments in Laiq Ram Sharma (CWP No.7526 of 2021) and the LPA affirming it, and to pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from receipt of copy of the order, communicating the decision so arrived at to the petitioner.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

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

¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition by Shakuntala seeking the pay scale of Rs.37000-67000+9000 (AGP) after three years from grant of Senior Selection Grade, with arrears and interest @ 18% per annum, on parity with Sh Sant Ram Chauhan and Sh Laiq Ram Chauhan, relying on Laiq Ram Sharma & Anr. vs. State of H.P. & Anr. (CWP No.7526 of 2021, decided 17.10.2023), which was affirmed in appeal (lead case State of H.P. & Anr. vs. Kartar Chand). Without examining the merits, the High Court (Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge) disposed of the petition, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's case in light of those judgments and pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law within four weeks, and to communicate the decision to her; pending miscellaneous application(s) also stand disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.6634 of 2021 Date of decision: 07.05.2025

¶3

Shakuntala. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents.

¶4

Coram:

¶5

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge .

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

For the petitioner : Mr. Dushyant Dadwal, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. P.K. Nadda, Additional Advocate General.

¶8

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶9

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage.

¶10

2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:-

¶11

“A. It is therefore, respectfully prayed that keeping in view the averments made in the present petition the present petition may kindly be allowed & the respondents may please directed to grant / release the pay scale of Rs 37000-67000+9000(AGP) to the petitioner after a period of 3 years from the grant of Senior Selection Grade, as has been done in the cases of Sh Sant Ram Chauhan & Sh Laiq Ram Chauhan while doing their fixations , with the further prayer to release the arrears of the same to the petitioner with interest @ 18% per annum, till the date of actual payment, for which she is legally & validly entitled, as has been granted to other similarly situated persons & in the interest of justice.

¶12

B. That the respondents may also be directed to produce the entire & complete records including the day to day noting

¶13

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

¶14

-2-

¶15

sheets in the case of petitioner as also in the case of Sh Sant Ram & Sh Laiq Ram Chauhan & various other persons, to show unto this Hon'ble Court that how best the honest & sincere employee of the department can be harassed.”

¶16

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶17

the issue raised in this writ petition and the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner have already been adjudicated upon by this Court. Reliance has been placed upon decision rendered in

¶18

Laiq Ram Sharma & Anr. vs. State of H.P. & Anr.¹ .

¶19

Relevant portion of which reads as under:-

¶20

“10. Once the petitioners being Assistant Librarians were allowed the benefit of UGC scales, the defence raised on behalf of the respondents, as noticed above, is not justifiable especially in view of Clause 5 (c ) (vi) of the notification dated 15.10.2009 issued by the Higher Education Department of Government of H.P. It is not the case of respondents that the petitioners had not completed three years in pre-revised pay scale of Rs.12000-18300 on 01.01.2006. Even the impugned office order dated 19.06.2018 reveals that on 01.04.1996, the petitioners were granted the Selection Grade Pay Scale of Rs.12000-18300. Thus, they had completed about 10 years in the said scale till 01.01.2006 and as per the above notification, they were entitled to the pay band of Rs.37400-67000 + AGP 9000/-. The respondents had rightly fixed the petitioners in the pay band of Rs.37400-67000+ AGP 9000/w.e.f. 01.01.2006.

¶21

11. Further, the impugned order dated 19.06.2018 does not provide any reasons for deviation from aforesaid order dated 15.10.2009.

¶22

12. In result, the impugned office orders dated 19.06.2018 and 22.10.2021 are quashed and set-aside.”

¶23

The aforesaid judgment was affirmed in LPA

¶24

No.311 of 2024 ( State of H.P. & Anr. vs. Laiq Ram Sharma & Anr. ) decided along with connected matters with lead case

¶25

1CWP No.7526 of 2021, decided along with connected matters on 17.10.2023.

¶26

-3-

¶27

State of H.P. & Anr. vs. Kartar Chand² . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is similarly situated to the petitioners in Laiq Ram’s¹ case, hence, petitioner would be satisfied, if her case is considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgments within a time-bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer.

¶28

4. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgments and pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioners.

¶29

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

¶30

Jyotsna Rewal Dua 7^th May, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)

¶31

2LPA No.356 of 2024 decided along with connected matters on 09.01.2025.

Shakuntla v. State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakuntla v. State of Hp and Anr.

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

Saroj Bala and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Briksha Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

Nand Lal Vs the Hpsfc and Another

Pooja Verma Vs the State of Hp and Others

Rakesh Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

Hardev Pal Vs State of Hp and Others