Subhash Chand vs State Of H.P. And Others

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

CMP No.16091 of 2022

Allowed and disposed of.

CWP No.59 of 2020

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to release Grant-in-Aid from the date of his appointment, i.e. 02.06.2014, alongwith interest.

During hearing of the case, learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the relief claimed by the petitioner is covered under the judgment dated 21.07.2022 passed in CWP No.4876 of 2022 (Shri Jai Prakash Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another), which, in turn, had followed the decision dated 26.11.2018 rendered in LPA No.53 of 2018 (State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Sh. Villam Singh). Learned vice counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case he is permitted to make a representation to the respondents/competent authority and the respondents are directed to consider and decide the same in light of the aforesaid judgments in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to the aforesaid proposal.

In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without examining the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file representation for redressal of his grievances raised in this writ petition, to the respondents/competent authority within a period of two weeks from today. In case, such a representation is so made by the petitioner, then the same shall be considered and decided by the said authority, in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks thereafter. While deciding the representation, the judgment passed in Jai Prakash’s case, supra, shall be kept in view. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.