High CourtsDivision Bench

Beni Madhav vs State of H.P. and Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 28 July 2010 · Citation: (2010) 07 SHI CK 0143

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kurian Joseph, C.J · Kuldip Singh, J
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 229 words

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

(i) That writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued to the respondent department to count past services of the petitioner rendered as Panchayat Secretary under Panchayat Samiti w.e.f. 19.11.1955 to 31.5.1984 under Panchayat Department towards qualifying service for the purpose of pension, retrial and other consequential benefits in a time bound manner.

(ii) That the respondents may be directed to grant revised service pension and service gratuity to the petitioner from the date it fell due with compound interest.

(iii) That the respondents may be directed to decide the representation, Annexure P-3, of the petitioner.

2.

This matter is covered by Annexure P-2, judgment of this Court dated 31st July, 2008 in CWP No. 1802 of 2002, it is submitted. There will be a direction to the second respondent to look into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law. If the petitioner is similarly situated as the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment and in case the said judgment has become final, similar treatment shall be extended to him also. Needful shall be done within two weeks on the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition by the petitioner.

3.

The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.

Dasti copy.