Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/20009/2026 on 5 November 2026
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
CWP No.20009 of 2026.
Decided on : 5
th November
, 2026
Rameshwar Kumar ...Petitioner.
Versus Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Palampur & Ors. ....Respondents.
Coram:
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Radhey Shyam Gautam, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ruchirangad Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Petitioner feels aggrieved against the action of the respondent-university in not disbursing in his favour the arrears amounting to Rs.15,33,820/-, duly sanctioned and released by the funding agency i.e. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), towards its 75% share of liability.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that similar issue raised in Dr. Punam versus CSKHPKV, Palampur and others2 was 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2CWP No. 15811 OF 2026, decided on 09.10.2026. High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2026 03:10:58 :::CIS
2 decided in favour of petitioners therein and the case of the petitioner in essence is covered by the directions issued in Dr. Poonam2.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 has placed on record compendium of documents including office letter dated 05.11.2026 addressed by respondent to State Bank of India, HPAU, Palampur and on that basis submits that the respondent has remitted 75% share of ICAR against revision of pay scale arrears admissible to certain employees/retirees, including the petitioner, after deducting income tax. Learned counsel submits that since the amount admissible to the petitioner has already been remitted to the State Bank of India, in all likelihood it will be credited in the bank accounts of the petitioner within two weeks.
4. Taking note of the documents placed on record by learned counsel for the respondent-University and the submissions made by him, this writ petition is to stand disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 5th November, 2026.
(jai)
High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2026 03:10:58 :::CIS