Himachal Pradesh High Court

WRIT PETITION 11520 of 2011 on 29 December 2011

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,SHIMLA.

CWP No. 11520 of 2011-BDecided on: 29.12.2011

Yog Raj, S/o Sh. Mahant Ram, R/o VPO Hari Behna, Tehsil Sarkaghat, Distt. Mandi, H.P.

....Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2.the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2.

2. Director, Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171 001.Shimla-171 001.

5. Deputy Director of Elementary Education Mandi, Distt. Mandi, (HP). Mandi, (HP).

....Respondents

Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice.The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge.

Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral)

The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayer:- “i)That a writ of mandamus may very kindly be issued thereby directing the respondents to count the untrained period of petitioner w.e.f. 1966 to 1970 as regular period and thereafter all consequential benefits of pay, arrears, seniority, pay fixation etc. may very kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.” kindly be issued thereby directing the respondents to count the untrained period of petitioner w.e.f. 1966 to 1970 as regular period and thereafter all consequential benefits of pay, arrears, seniority, pay fixation etc. may very kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.”

2. According to the petitioner, the issue is covered by the decision of this Court in Hira Lal versus State of H.P. & another in CWP No. 319 of 1997, decided on 17.6.2008. The petitioner has submitted Annexure P-1, representation and the same is pending before the third respondent. There will be a direction to the third respondent/competent authority to look into Annexure P-1 and take appropriate action in accordance with law, also in the light of the decision, referred to above, within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition and a copy of the judgment, referred to above, by the petitioner before the third respondent/competent authority.

3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.

(Justice Kurian Joseph),Chief Justice.

December 29, 2011( ms/hl)

(Justice Dev Dasrshan Sud), Judge.

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead