High CourtsSingle Bench

Lalman & Others vs P.C. Dhiman And Another

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 16 June 2020 · Citation: (2020) 06 SHI CK 0071

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Mohan Goel, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
COPCT No. 50 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

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

7 paragraphs · 292 words

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

1.

By way of this Contempt Petition, petitioners had approached this Court, feeling aggrieved by the fact that the order passed by the learned erstwhile State Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.251 of 2015, dated 25.03.2015, titled Lal Man & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others, was not complied with by the respondents herein in letter and spirit.

2.

Perusal of the order passed by the learned Tribunal demonstrates that the Original Application, which was filed by the petitioners, stood disposed of in the following terms:­

" In view of the above, the original application is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment in CWP No.6403 of 2013, with a direction to the respondents that subject to the above verification of records and on finding the applicants to be similarly situate persons As above, benefit of the said judgment, if the same has attained finality and implemented, shall also be extended to them, if otherwise found eligible as per relevant recruitment and promotion rules, alongwith consequential benefits, if any, as per law, with any discrimination, by 30.5.2015".

3.

Record demonstrates that during the pendency of this Contempt Petition, an order was passed by the competent authority on 26.03.2016, in terms of the order passed by the learned Tribunal.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition be disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioners to assail the order, which stood passed by the competent authority, dated 26.03.2016. Ordered accordingly.

5.

Petition is closed due to subsequent developments, however, with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the subsequents orders, which stand passed by the authority concerned on 26.03.2016. Notices stand discharged. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.