High CourtsDivision Bench

Devi Ram vs State of H.P.

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 13 June 2012 · Citation: (2012) 06 SHI CK 0162

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kurian Joseph, C.J · Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J
CASE NUMBER
CWPs No. 3933 of 2012-D
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

2 paragraphs · 184 words

Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The petitioner claims the benefit of ad hoc service followed by regular service for the purpose of pension and increments. According to the petitioner, the issue is covered in his favour by the judgment of this Court rendered in LPA No. 36 of 2010, Sita Ram vs. State. Learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioner submits that he would file appropriate representation furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for him to do so.

2.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent concerned to examine the matter, after verifying the facts, in the light of the judgment referred to above and take appropriate action thereon within a period of four months from the date of the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and the copy of the judgment referred to above. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.