Mast Ram vs Kumud Singh And Other

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Present petition has been filed for violation of order dated 18th May, 2017 passed in Original Application No. 1999 of 2017, titled Mast Ram Vs. H.P. State Electricity Board and another, by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, wherein it has been recorded that counsel for the petitioner has claimed that his case is securely covered by the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316 and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has stated that subject to verification of record, if found that petitioner would be similarly situated as the petitioners in the judgment in Mool Raj Upadhyaya's case, then his case would be considered accordingly, whereupon erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal has directed the respondents/competent authority that subject to verification and on finding the petitioner to be similarly situated as of petitioners in Mool Raj Upadhyaya's case, benefits of said judgment shall also be extended to him along with consequential benefits within three months from the date of production of certified copy of order.

In response to the petition, reply/affidavit has been filed, along with which copy of order dated 5.1.2018 has been placed on record and it is stated that the case of the petitioner has been considered and on the basis of facts, it has been found that he is not covered by Mool Raj Upadhyaya's Case and, therefore, his claim has been rejected.

Now, rightly or wrongly, concerned authority has considered and rejected the case of the petitioner in exercise undertaken for compliance of order passed by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal. The issue as to whether petitioner is squarely covered by judgment of Mool Raj Upadhyaya's case or not was not adjudicated by the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, but it was left open to the competent authority to decide the same. Therefore, now appropriate course for the petitioner, if he is still aggrieved by the order passed by the competent authority, is to file a petition before the competent forum for adjudication of this issue in accordance with law.

In view of above, petition is closed and disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate petition for redressal of his grievances, if any still survive. It is made clear that delay and laches will not come in the way of petitioner, as he was bonafide adjudicating his cause in present petition.