Disposed¶19

Anmol Kapoor and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC23 May 2025CWP/8552/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HP High Court Shimla; CWP No.8552 of 2025; Anmol Kapoor & Anr v. State of HP & Ors; decided 23-05-2025 by Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.; pay fixation; higher stage of pay Rs 33400 from Rs 29,700; regularization date September 2021; arrears; reliance on Mohit Sharma case CWP No 1638/24; Article 226; writ disposed of with liberty to file representation; competent authority to decide within six weeks; no adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to prefer a representation within two weeks; the competent authority to decide such representation in accordance with law within six weeks thereafter and communicate the order to the petitioners; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also disposed of. ¶19

Anmol Kapoor and Another Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the higher stage of pay of Rs 33400 (from Rs 29,700) after completion of two years of regular service in terms of the decision in Mohit Sharma case (CWP No 1638/24), with the date of regularization computed as September 2021, and release of full arrears from the due date.

¶12

Court's answer

The petitioners had invoked the Court's extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 without preferring any representation to the competent authority for redressal of the grievances raised in the writ petition; on this basis the Court adopted the representation route instead of deciding the claim on merits.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that a representation would be preferred within two weeks; the Court directed that if such a representation is made, the competent authority shall decide it in accordance with law within six weeks thereafter, and the order so passed shall be communicated to the petitioners.

¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus for grant of higher stage of pay of Rs 33400 (from Rs 29,700) after completion of two years of regular service in terms of the decision in Mohit Sharma case (CWP No 1638/24, Annexure P-3), computation of the date of regularization as September 2021, and release of full arrears. The Court noted that the petitioners had approached it without first making any representation to the competent authority. On counsel's statement that a representation would be filed within two weeks, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction that, if such representation is made, the competent authority shall decide it in accordance with law within six weeks thereafter and communicate the order to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also disposed of. By Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.; decided 23 May 2025.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.8552 of 2025 Decided on: 23^rd May, 2025

¶3

__________________________ Anmol Kapoor & Anr	________________ Versus	_______________________ …..Petitioners
State of HP & Ors ________________________	_______________	…..Respondents. _______________

¶4

Coram

¶5

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶6

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

_________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

¶8

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶9

Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

a). To issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to grant higher stage of pay of Rs 33400 from Rs 29,700 to the Petitioners after completion of two years of regular service in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court as rendered in Mohit Sharma

¶13

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

¶14

¶15

case CWP No 1638/24 annexed as Annexure P- 3. The date of regularization may be computed as sep 2021 for all intents and purposes. Further salary may also be fixed as such.

¶16

b) That the Respondents may be directed to release full arrears from due date.”

¶17

3. Admittedly, the petitioners have invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redressal of grievances raised in the writ petition.

¶18

4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be preferring representation within two weeks from today. In case such a representation is so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioners.

¶19

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

¶20

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶21

May 23, 2025 R.Atal

Anmol Kapoor and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anmol Kapoor and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

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

Krishni Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others

Sanjeev Kumar and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Bhagat Ram Vs the State of Hp and Others

Vinay Kumar Vs the Hrtc and Others

Ranju Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others

Sudha Sharma Vs the State of Hp and Others