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 · 236 wordsKurian Joseph, C.J.—The writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:
a) Writ of mandamus be issued against the Respondents which are the statutory authority to perform and act in accordance with law and the Respondents be directed to promote the present Petitioner from the post of Chokidar (Class 4) to A/c Operator or Work Inspector (Class 3 employee) way back from the date when his juniors i.e. Respondent No. 5 & 6 were promoted i.e. 17.10.2007 with full pay scale and further directed to compensate the Petitioner for the loss of earnings during such period in the interest of justice.
According to the Petitioner, though, he has been working against the post of A/C Operator, he has been regularized only as Chowkidar. Though, the prayer for promotion is misconceived, it appears that the matter will have to be examined in the light of the decision in Gauri Dutt and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd Respondent to look into the matter in the light of the decision, referred to above, and take appropriate action within a period of four months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the Petitioner, with notice to the Petitioner and Respondents No. 5 & 6.
The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.