High CourtsDivision Bench

Sushma Modgil and Others vs State of H.P.

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 8 January 2013 · Citation: (2013) 01 SHI CK 0018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Karol, J · Kurian Joseph, J
CASE NUMBER
CWP 135 of 2013-D
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

5 paragraphs · 321 words

Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-

i) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to grant revised pay scale of Rs. 4550-7220/- to the petitioners w.e.f. their appointment till their regularization and arrears accrued there under be paid with interest @ 9% per annum, in the interest of justice.

ii) That the petitioners may also be kindly held entitled for the benefit of merger of 50% D.A. to basic pay+ 11% D.A. w.e.f. 30.4.2004 and further revision thereof from time to time till the regularization of his services, with all consequential benefits and arrears accrued on this count be paid with interest.

As far as prayer No. 1 is concerned, According to the petitioners, the issue is covered in their favour by the judgment of this Court dated 13.12.2012, in LPA No. 105 of 2010, titled as State of H.P. & others versus Rakesh Chand & others and connected matters. If that be so, a similar treatment shall also be extended to the petitioners herein also, in case the petitioners are also similarly situated.

2.

As far as prayer No. 2 is concerned, according to the petitioners, the issue is covered in their favour by the judgment of this Court rendered in CWP (T) No. 14232 of 2008, titled as Nek Ram & others Versus State of H.P. & others, decided on 17.11.2009. If that be so, similar treatment shall also be extended to the petitioners herein also, as extended to the petitioner in the above referred decision, in case the petitioners are also similarly situated. The needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and copy of judgments referred to above, by the petitioner concerned before the second respondent. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.