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
5 paragraphs · 262 wordsSatyen Vaidya, J
Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the Judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2004 of 2017, titled as Sh. Taj Mohammad and Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., with connected matters on 3.08.2023. He further submits that petitioner will be content at this stage in case the respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in a time bound manner in light of judgment ibid.
Prayer being innocuous is not opposed. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner strictly in light of judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2004 of 2017, titled as Sh. Taj Mohammad and Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., with connected matter on 3.08.2023, within eight weeks from today. In case, the petitioner is found similarly situated as private respondents in Taj Mohammad’s case (supra), she shall also be granted the same benefits as granted to private respondents in above referred case.
It is clarified that in the event of petitioner found entitled to monetary benefits, the same shall be restricted to a period of three years immediately preceding the date of filing of this petition. Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.