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
10 paragraphs · 189 wordsAnoop Chitkara, J
The petitioner, who was working as Constable in the Himachal Pradesh Police and retired as such on 30.06.2018 from Police Station, Rohru, has
come up before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to pay the benefit of one increment w.e.f. 07.12.1985, like Shri Kirpa Ram, who is
junior to the petitioner, with all consequential benefits, including retiral with interest. In this regard the petitioner has already made representation,
which is still pending before the authorities concerned.
Notice. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
In view of the nature of the order, we propose to pass, no response is required from the respondents.
Consequently, this petition is disposed of with a directions to the respondent/authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner, Annexure P-8,
dated 20.03.2020, in accordance with law, within two months. It is made clear that in case the petitioner is still aggrieved with the outcome of the
representation, he is at liberty to approach this Court again for redressal thereof. Pending application(s), if any, are closed.