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
6 paragraphs · 183 wordsSabina, J
Notice. Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment rendered in CWP No. 1853 of 2009-D, titled as Arpana Bali vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 10th April, 2013 and the said judgment, in turn, stands implemented by the respondents. This is a matter, which is required to be considered by the employer.
Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of the averments made in this petition and, more particularly, the judgment rendered in Arpana Bali’s case, which stands implemented. Needful be done within four weeks and in case the petitioner is similarly situated to Arpana Bali’s case, then consequential action be taken within two weeks.
The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any.
To come up for compliance on 19.6.2023.