Asha Rani Sharma Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Asha Rani Sharma Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 25.02.2025 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law within six weeks and to communicate the order so passed to the petitioner; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also disposed of. The substantive pay-scale claim itself was not adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of the pay scale of Rs.5480-8925 with effect from her initial date of joining instead of Rs.5000-8100, along with consequential benefits, payment/release of accrued arrears with interest @ 9% p.a., and release of revised pay scale with basic pay grade. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Once the legal principle involved has already been decided, the welfare State is expected to consider and decide the aggrieved employee's representation within a reasonable time and not sit over it indefinitely; prolonged non-decision multiplies litigation and adds unproductive government-induced litigation to the Court docket, contrary to the purport and object of the Litigation Policy of the State.

Key takeaways

The writ petition stands disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 25.02.2025 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law within a period of six weeks, and to communicate the order so passed to the petitioner; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also disposed of.ratio¶¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Single Judge: Jyotsna Rewal Dua), CWP No.7692 of 2025, decided 09.05.2025 — Petitioner Asha Rani Sharma sought grant of pay scale Rs.5480-8925 from the initial date of joining instead of Rs.5000-8100, with consequential benefits, arrears with interest @ 9% p.a., and release of revised pay scale with basic pay grade, invoking judgment dated 4.09.2021 in CWP No.3341 of 2019 (Madan Lal Sharma v. State of H.P. & Anr.) on the plea that the legal issue stood already adjudicated; her immediate grievance was non-decision of her representation dated 25.02.2025 (Annexure P-5). Held: once the legal principle is already decided, the welfare State is expected to consider and decide an aggrieved employee's representation within a reasonable time and not sit over it indefinitely, as months-long silence breeds multiplication of litigation and unproductive government-induced litigation, contrary to the Litigation Policy of the State. The writ petition was disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to decide the representation in accordance with law within six weeks and communicate the order to the petitioner; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, were likewise disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.7692 of 2025

Decided on: 9^th May, 2025

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Asha Rani Sharma …..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and others

.....Respondents

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the Petitioner: Mr. Skandh Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned

Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

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

“I. That respondents may very kindly be directed to grant the pay scale of Rs.5480-8925 with effect from the initial date of joining instead of Rs.5000-8100 to the petitioner, along with all consequential benefits and arrears accrued thereunder may kindly be ordered to be paid/released with interest @ 9% p.a. in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of justice, also in light of judgment dated 4.09.2021 in CWP No.3341 of 2019 titled: Madan Lal Sharma Versus state of H.P. & Anr.;

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2

II. The respondents may very kindly be directed to release revised pay scale to the petitioner with the basic pay grade along with all other consequential benefits.”

3. According to the petitioner, the legal issue

involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the petitioner is that her representation dated 25.02.2025 (Annexure P-5) has still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority.

4. Once the legal principle involved in the adjudication of present petition has already been decided, it is expected from the welfare State to consider and decide the representation of the aggrieved employee within a reasonable time and not to sit over the same indefinitely compelling the employee to come to the Court for redressal of his grievances. This is also the purport and object of the Litigation Policy of the State. Not taking decision on the representation for months together would not only give rise to unnecessary multiplication of the litigation, but would also bring in otherwise avoidable increase to the Court docket on unproductive government induced litigation.

5 . In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 25.02.2025

3

(Annexure P-5) in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 09, 2025 Judge Mukesh