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
4 paragraphs · 330 wordsAjay Mohan Goel, J
Heard for sometime. Learned counsel for the petitioner while drawing the attention of the Court towards Office Order dated 06.04.2021, has argued that once the services of the petitioner were ordered to be regularized w.e.f. 04.11.2004, then the subsequent act of the respondents of making benefits of regularization notional in terms of Office Order dated 26.11.2021 clearly amounts to overreaching the directions passed by the Court.
On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the directions which were passed in the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner alongwith other persons were only to the effect that the case of the petitioner was directed to be considered in the light of the judgments reflected in the judgment dated 19.09.2014 passed by this Court in CWP No.10426 of 2012, titled as Dila Ram Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others and other connected matters and in fact the government has given the benefits to the petitioner in terms of the judgment in Rati Ram’s case, by ordering his regularization w.e.f. 04.11.2004. He has further submitted that perusal of order dated 06.04.2021 would demonstrate that it was clearly contemplated therein that consequential services benefits will follow as per the recommendations of the Review Departmental Promotional Committee dated 10.03.2021 and therefore, there is no willful disobedience of the directions passed by this Court.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, as this Court is of the considered view that whether or not the petitioner is entitled for consequential service benefits post regularization actual or notional, is a fresh cause which has accrued in favour of the petitioner after passing of orders dated 06.04.2021 and 26.11.2021 and per se there is no willful disobedience of the directions passed by the Court, these contempt proceedings are closed, with liberty to the petitioner to assail the grant of benefits post regularization which stand granted to him on notional basis, by way of appropriate proceedings. Notice stands discharged.
