Seema Kumari & Anr vs State Of H.P. & Ors

Satyen Vaidya, J

The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:­

“i) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from the date of their initial engagement/appointment with all consequential benefits on the principle of equality as they are appointed on batch wise basis under same requisition of seats under category of ward of ex­ serviceman as per un­amended Rules.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from the date of their initial engagement/ appointment with all consequential benefits in terms of the judgments passed by this Hon’ble Court in CWP/7602/2010 titled as Om Parkash vs. State of H.P. & others and connected matters, CWP No. 3144 of 2011 titled as Anju Devi vs. State of H.P. & others and CWP No. 3143 of 2011 titled Manju Devi vs. State of H.P. and others.

iii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the entire consequential benefits along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of their initial appointment to till the date of realization.”

iv) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to extend the same and similar benefits as has been extended to Ms Rakhi (LT), Mr. Tej Ram (LT) & Mr. Kuldip Chand (TGT now Lecturer) in terms of judgments passed in CWP No. 7602/2020 titled as Om Parkash vs. State of H.P. & others and connected matters CWP No. 3144 of 2011 titled as Anju Devi vs. State of H.P. & others and CWP No. 3143 of 2011 titled as Manju Devi vs. State of H.P. & others by this Hon’ble Court.”

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the subject matter of instant petition is squarely covered by a judgment passed by a Devision Bench of this Court on 04.10.2019 in LPA No. 21 of 2013, titled as State of H.P. & Ors. vs. Ravinder Kumar, along with connected matters. He further submits that the judgment passed in LPA No.21 of 2013 has already been implemented by the State Government.

He submits that the petitioners in the instant petition shall be satisfied, at this stage, in case time bound directions are issued to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioners in light of judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 21 of 2013.

Prayer being innocuous is not opposed. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioners within eight weeks from today strictly in terms of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 04.10.2019 in LPA No. 21 of 2013, titled as State of H.P. & Ors. vs. Ravinder Kumar, along with connected matters, by passing a detailed and reasoned order. Needless to say that in case the petitioners are found entitled to the benefits of aforesaid judgment, they shall be granted all similar benefits as have been granted to the beneficiaries of judgment passed in LPA No.21 of 2013 within six weeks thereafter. It is clarified that monetary benefits, if any, available to the petitioners shall be restricted to a period of three years only immediately preceding the date of filing of instant petition. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.