Sada Ram and Others vs State of H.P. and Others

Dev Darshan Sood, J.—Heard. The petitioners are aggrieved by Annexure P-33, which reads:

In this connection, you are intimated that the judgment delivered by the Hon''ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the above titled case is only applicable to those JBTs who were appointed as untrained and are petitioners in the above titled case.

Hence, the above mentioned judgment does not cover the claim if any of non-petitioners.

We find this as strange logic, rejecting the case of the petitioners. The petitioners are not expected to agitate their claim individually. Therefore, we direct that in case the stand of the petitioners is factually correct and their case is covered by the judgments of this Court in CWP No. 319 of 1997, titled as Hira Lal versus State of H.P. and another, decided on 17th June, 2008 and CWP(T) No. 4249 of 2008, titled as Dila Ram and others versus State of H.P. and others, decided on 10th April, 2009, they shall be paid the benefits due to them in accordance with the two judgments aforesaid. Such determination shall be done within a period of four weeks from today after granting the petitioners an opportunity of being heard and placing on record such other and further material on which they seek to rely. We direct that the determination shall be by a reasoned and speaking order. Petition stands disposed of.

All pending miscellaneous applications also stand disposed of.