IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.5001 of 2024
Decided on: 31st May, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manohar Lal …..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and another .....Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. R.S. Verma and Mr. Y.P.S.
Dhaulta, Additional Advocates General.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional
Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on
behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the
parties, the matter is heard at this stage.
3. The case of the petitioner is that he was
appointed as Clerk on contract basis vide letter dated
15.10.2013. His appointment was made in accordance with
the applicable Recruitment & Promotion (R&P) Rules,
though on contract basis. The continued contractual
1
Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2
service of the petitioner was followed by regularization on
26.11.2017. With the grievance that his representation
regarding counting contractual service for the purpose of
annual increment, leave encashment, career progression
scheme, pension etc. has not been decided by the
competent authority, this writ petition has been preferred
for the grant of following substantive relief:-
“(i) That an appropriate writ, order or directions may kindly
be issued, thereby directing the respondents to count
the contract services rendered by the petitioner for all
purposes including the purposes of annual increments,
leave encashment, career progression scheme and for
the purposes of counting the services towards pension
and the contract service rendered by the petitioner may
very kindly be ordered to be counted for the purposes of
seniority and they may kindly be released all the
consequential benefits after counting of their contract
service from the date of their initial appointment by
granting the arrears alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. in the
interest of justice and fair play.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the above reliefs have been prayed for on the strength
of the decision in CWP No.2004 of 2017 (Taj Mohammad
and others Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and
others), decided alongwith connected matter on
03.08.2023. Learned counsel further submits that the
petitioner would be content in case the respondents are
directed to consider and decide his case for grant of above
3
reliefs in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time
schedule.
Learned Additional Advocate General submits
that the respondents are not averse to consider the case of
the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment, however,
all rights and contentions of the parties be left open for
decision.
5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but
without examining the merits of the matter, this writ
petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to
consider and decide the case of the petitioner for grant of
the reliefs prayed for in the petition, in accordance with law
and taking into consideration the above judgment in the
case of Taj Mohammad, supra, within a period of six weeks
from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be
communicated to the petitioner.
It is clarified that all rights and contentions of
the parties are left open.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above
terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if
any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
May 31, 2024 Judge
Mukesh