Chander Kala and Others vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The application was filed before the Tribunal mainly with the following prayer:

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed:

I) That the respondents may be directed to release enhanced grants-in-aid to the respondent No. 4 School for the sessions 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96;

II) That the respondent No. 4 School may further be directed to disburse the salary to the applicants at par with Government Schools after receiving the grants-in-aid w.e.f. 1993 to 1996 with interest @ 18% per annum;

III)That the respondents may be directed to grant to the applicants Nos. 1 to 4 regular pay scale which are being paid to their counterparts in Government Schools alongwith other benefits like D.A. etc.

No reply has been filed so far. Be that as it may. Since the petitioners have sought writ of mandamus, it is for the petitioners to approach the 1st respondent.

We are informed that the petitioners have already approached the 1st respondent by way of representation. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:

There will be a direction to the 1st respondent /competent authority to consider the representations filed by the petitioners and take appropriate action, in accordance with law, within a period of three months, from the date of production of copy of this judgment alongwith the copy of the writ petition by the petitioners.

In the process, it is the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the issue is covered in favour of the petitioners by the decision of the Supreme Court in State of H.P. Vs. H.P. State Recognised and Aided Schools Managing Committees and Others, The respondents will also take into consideration the case, referred to above, while taking the decision.

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

Copy Dasti.