WRIT PETITION 9059 of 2011 on 29 December 1999

Conclusion

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.CWP No. 9059 of 2011Decided on: 9[th] July, 2014

Ram Singh

.......Petitioner.

Versus

State of H.P and others

...Respondents.

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?[1] No.

For the petitioner: Mr. P.D. Nanda and Mr. J.R. Gazta, Advocates.

For the respondents: Mr. D.S. Nainta and Mr. Virender Verma, Addl. A.Gs with Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Dy. A.G for the respondent-State.

Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.3.

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge (Oral)

The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

i) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay due and permissible pension to the petitioner after adjusting the element of employer share of EPF contribution and EPF pension in accordance with Himachal Pradesh Corporate Sector Employees (Pension, Family pension, Commutation of Pension and Gratuity) Scheme, 1999 notified on 29.12.1999 Annexure P-1, for which the petitioner has opted. issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay due and permissible pension to the petitioner after adjusting the element of employer share of EPF contribution and EPF pension in accordance with Himachal Pradesh Corporate Sector Employees (Pension, Family pension, Commutation of Pension and Gratuity) Scheme, 1999 notified on 29.12.1999 Annexure P-1, for which the petitioner has opted.

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

2.

ii) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Corporation to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date his junior has been regularized/promoted as per orders of the erstwhile Administrative Tribunal, which is in fact a clarification on the Recruitment & Promotion Rules applicable to the petitioner.”

According to the petitioner, he is similarly situated as the appellant in LPA No. 346 of 2011 titled as H.P. State Forest Development Corporation versus Smt. Bimla Sood and others, decided on 24[th] May, 2012. In case the petitioner is similarly situated, in case the judgment has attained finality and the same has been implemented, similar treatment shall be given to the petitioner herein also. The needful shall be done by the 3[rd] respondent within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition and copy of the judgment referred to above.

3. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.

July 9, 2014 (Dharam Chand Chaudhary) (naveen) Judge