Govind Ram v. State of H.P & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be preferring representation(s) within two weeks from today. In case such a representation(s) is/are so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a…
Judgment
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. A.K.Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 3 in both the petitions. Mr. T.R.Sharma, respondent No.4 petitions. Advocate in both 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. T.R.Sharma, learned Counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of the respondents No. 1 to 3 and respondent No.4 in both the petitions.
These writ petitions have been filed for grant of following almost common relief, which has been extracted from CWP No. 2642 of 2025: - “ i) That the respondents may be ordered to pay pension to the petitioner as per the notification dated May 2023 issued by the Govt. of H.P. with all benefits incidental thereof.”
Admittedly, the petitioners have invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation(s) to the competent authority for the redressal of their grievances raised in the writ petitions.
Operative part
Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be preferring representation(s) within two weeks from today. In case such a representation(s) is/are so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a - 3 - period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. February 27, 2025 R.Atal Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Himachal Pradesh High Court, on 27 Feb 2025.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.