High CourtsDivision Bench

Ramdei vs State Of H.P. & Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 26 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 SHI CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J · Satyen Vaidya, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No.4108 Of 2023
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

8 paragraphs · 343 words

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J

1.

Issue notice. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2.

The instant petition has been filed for the grant of the following substantive reliefs:-

“i) That a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or directions may kindly be issued to struck-down, quash and set aside the cut-off date, i.e. the date of appointment with regard to the part time/daily wages basis, being 10.5.2001, which has been taken to be the criteria for increase in retirement age from 58 to 60 years, as mentioned in the notification dated 21.2.2018 (Annexure P-4) by holding the same to be arbitrary, artificial, discriminatory, unreasonable, irrational, unfair, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of India.

ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions may kindly be issued directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in service till attainment the age of 60 years with all consequential benefits incidental thereof.”

3.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the issue in the instant petition is no longer res- integra, as it stands squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Full Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2711 of 2011, case titled Baldev vs. State of H.P. & others, decided on 22.02.2022 alongwith other connected matters. This is a matter, which is required to be considered by the respondents.

4.

In the given facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of this case, we deem it proper to dispose of this petition by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment and in case the same is found to be covered, then the same and similar benefit be extended to the petitioner herein also. Ordered accordingly. The entire exercise be completed within four weeks from today.

5.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.