Himachal Pradesh High Court
EX.PT/460/2020 on 30 December 2022
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Ex. Pet. No.460 of 2020 Decided on: 30th December, 2022 _________________________________________________________________ Om Parkash
....Petitioner
Versus State of H.P. & Ors.
…Respondents _________________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Parav Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Ms. Ritta Goswami, Additional Advocate General.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Original Application No.2018 of 2019, filed by the petitioner was allowed by the learned erstwhile H.P. Administrative Tribunal on 31.05.2019 in the following terms: - “4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits at the very outset that the case of the applicant is squarely covered under judgment dated 30.11.2010 rendered by the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in CWP(T) No.6037 of 2008, H.P. Rajkiya Prathmik Anubandh Adhyapak Sangh Versus State of H.P. and another, as upheld in LPA No.108 of 2012, vide common judgment dated 13th December, 212, Annexure P-4, in LPA No.105 of 2010-C, The State of Himachal Pradesh and others
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Versus Rakesh Chand and others and the connected matters.
5. The learned Additional Advocate General states that subject to verification of record, if it is found that the applicant is similarly situate as the petitioners/ beneficiaries in the aforesaid judgments, his case shall also be considered accordingly.
6. In view of the above, the original application is disposed of in terms of the aforementioned judgments with a direction to the respondents/competent authority that subject to the above verification and on finding the applicant to be similarly situate as above, benefit of the said judgments, if the same have attained finality/ implemented, shall be extended to him alongwith consequential benefits, if any, as per law, within three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order alongwith copy of the aforementioned judgments in CWP(T) No.6037 of 2008, before the said authority by the applicant.”
2. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record instructions dated 10.12.2020 alongwith Treasury abstract dated 14.09.2020. According to the instructions, ‘all Deputy Directors of Elementary Education, vide Directorate letter dated 05.08.2020, had been directed to implement the judgment passed on the analogy of CWP(T) No.6037 of 2008 (Himachal Pradesh Rajkiya Prathmik Anubandh Adhyapak Sangh Vs. State of H.P. & Ors) by passing speaking order being appointing/implementing authority of the category concerned…….the arrear bill of the petitioner amounting to Rs.2,07,150/- has been submitted in the Treasury concerned on 30.11.2020.’ The Treasury abstract has been placed on record alongwith the instructions. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that after making admissible deductions, an amount of Rs.1,85,466/- had been paid to the petitioner and that the judgment in question stands complied with.
3. In view of the above statement and documents placed on record, the present execution petition is disposed of. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to revive the execution petition, in case need so arises in future. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge December 30, 2022 R.Atal