Kusum Sharma vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers:

a) That impugned act of the Respondents, which, in fact, amounts to executive inaction, may very kindly be quashed and set aside with directions to the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner at par with 24 writ Petitioners and claim of said writ Petitioners having already been decided by this Hon''ble Court on 24.5.2010 and vide Annexure P-3, Respondents allowed benefits accruing to the said writ Petitioners and as such, directions may be given to Respondents to grant said relief(s) in favour of the Petitioner also;

b) That services of the Petitioner having already been re-engaged but benefit of past service having not been given in her favour, as such, directions may be given to the Respondents to consider and grant benefit of past services rendered by Petitioner as is clear from perusal of Annexure P-1;

c) That further direction may be given to the Respondents to regularize the services of the Petitioner accordingly w.e.f. 1.1.1994 in view of judgment of Mool Raj Upadhayaya''s case with all consequential benefits.

According to the Petitioner she is similarly situated as the workman It is for the Petitioner to file appropriate representation before the second Respondent. In the event of such representation being filed within a period of one month from today along with a copy of the writ petition and the copy of this judgment, the matter will be duly considered by the second Respondent/competent authority and appropriate orders thereon shall be passed within another four months.

The Writ Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.