High CourtsSingle Bench

Prem Chand Sharma And Ors vs Onkar Chand Sharma And Anr

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 19 June 2020 · Citation: (2020) 06 SHI CK 0261

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sandeep Sharma, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
COPCT No. 220 Of 2020

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 315 words

Sandeep Sharma, J

1.

By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the judgment dated 1.4.2016, passed by the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 1204 of 2016, whereby the Tribunal below having taken note of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that their cases are squarely covered by the judgment dated 20.9.2012, rendered by this Court in CWP No. 3660 of 2012, directed the respondents-Authority to consider the case of the petitioners strictly in light of aforesaid judgment and extend similar benefit to them, if they are found similarly situate alongwith consequential benefits within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.

2.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and material available on record, this Court finds that Joint Secretary (Rural Development) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh vide communication dated 20.6.2017, addressed to the learned Additional Advocate General, HP State Administrative Tribunal, which is part of the record, has intimated that judgment alleged to have been violated has been duly complied with. Perusal of aforesaid communication clearly reveals that the petitioners herein have been granted benefits on the analogy of Kulbir Singh Rana vide notification dated 20.6.2017 and as a consequence, they have been granted pay scale of Rs. 7880-11660 revised to Rs. 10300-34800+5400/Grade pay as measure personal to them from the date of their respective appointments as Block Development Officer in the department.

3.

Consequently, in view of the aforesaid compliance, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and accordingly, same are closed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate Court of law, if they are still aggrieved. Notices issued to respondents are discharged at this stage.