Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWPOA/2774/2019 on 29 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, SHIMLA
CWPOA No. 2774 of 2019
Decided on: 29.12.2022 Sh. Madan Lal
.…Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. R. K. Gautam, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Jai Ram Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents : M/s Sumesh Raj, Dinesh Thakur
and Sanjeev Sood, Additional
Advocate General.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
The petitioner is aggrieved by the termination of his services by the department concerned inter alia on the ground that the same was without following the principles of natural justice and further at the time when the services of the petitioner were verbally terminated, persons junior to him were retained. This contention of the petitioner is seriously opposed on behalf of the State.
2. Be that as it may, having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having gone through the averments made in the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith, as agreed, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
High Court of H.P. 2022:HHC:16498 ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2026 04:18:33 :::CIS
petitioner to approach the authority concerned and in the event of the petitioner approaching the authority concerned within a period of four weeks from today, let an appropriate order be passed thereupon by the authority concerned within a period of six weeks thereafter.
3. At this stage, Mr. R.K. Gautam, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it may be observed that if work is available, then the department concerned may engage the petitioner. The petitioner may make such a request in the representation to be filed by him and the Court observes that in the event of the work being available, let the prayer of the petitioner be considered compassionately and sympathetically by the authority concerned in view of the fact that he has served the department in his younger days.
With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) December 29, 2022
Judge (narender) High Court of H.P. 2022:HHC:16498 ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2026 04:18:33 :::CIS