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
6 paragraphs · 246 wordsJyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Notice. Mr. Sikander Bhushan, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.
Petitioners’ grievance is that their respective representations (Annexure P-12 to Annexure P-15) seeking applicability of Dinesh Kumar and Ors. Versus State of Himachal Pradsh and Ors.[ CWP No.1747 of 2023, decided on 9.10.2023] in order to claim the relief for stepping-up of their pay at par with their juniors, have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Dinesh Kumar[CWP No.1747 of 2023, decided on 9.10.2023] within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.