AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.A. Sayed, CJ
The petitioner, who is working as Head Constable with the respondent-Department, is seeking pay and salary at par with his junior under FR (Fundamental Rules) 22 (1) (a) (I) after removing the anomalies.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case of the petitioner is covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.2087-2088 of 2022 (Union of India & Ors. Versus Shri C.R. Madhava Murthy & Anr.).
The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has made a representation dated 26.08.2022 (Annexure P-10) to respondent No.4-Commandant 1st HPAT (Himachal Pradesh Armed Police) Junga, District Shimla.
The learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the petitioner would be content if the aforesaid representation is decided in a time bound manner.
In the circumstances, we accede to the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner and accordingly direct respondent No.4 to decide the aforesaid representation (Annexure P-10) expeditiously and not later than eight weeks from today.
The petition to stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
