CWP/338/2024 on 31 December 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.338 of 2024

Decided on: 31st December, 2024 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chet Singh

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and others

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Munish Datwalia, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

The respondents though have filed the reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “i) That the Hon’ble court may kindly direct the respondents to extend the benefits of Judgment dated 7-7-2023 passed in CWP No.2500/2021 in favour of petitioner. ii) That Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to issue the writ in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned action of the respondents, whereby they have been denied the benefits of promotion increment by not invoking the provisions of FR 22(I)(a)(1) as has been done with incumbents promoted to the post of Head Teacher after 1.10.2012.

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

iii) That Your Lordships may further graciously be pleased to issue the writ in nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioners in pay band of 10300-34800+4400 grade pay with additional 3% promotional increment w.e.f. 1.10.2012 with all consequentially benefits as has done with the incumbents promoted to the post of Head Teacher after 1.10.2012 with all consequential benefits @ 9%.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner and the issues raised by him in the writ petition are squarely covered in terms of the decision rendered in Ranjit Singh and others Versus State of H.P. and others2. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be content in case a direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide his case for redressal of the grievances raised in the writ petition in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner for redressal of his grievances raised in the writ petition, in accordance with law and taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Ranjit

2 CWP No.2500 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 07.07.2023

Singh2, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be 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 December 31, 2024

Judge

Mukesh