Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RANJAN SHARMA
Vikas Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. wrongful reservation led to delayed constable appointment. (Para 2) |
| 2. demand for actual financial benefits from 2011. (Para 3) |
| 3. respondents defend via fr17 and service rules. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. petitioner rebuts fr17; seeks full service benefits. (Para 6) |
| 5. review of statutes and pay revision notifications. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. precedents mandate monetary benefits retrospectively. (Para 9) |
| 7. fr17 inapplicable to employer-fault delays. (Para 10) |
| 8. deemed regular service counts for higher pay. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 9. pay parity required with similarly placed juniors. (Para 13) |
| 10. quash notional condition; grant all benefits. (Para 14) |
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Petitioner-Vikas Kumar, a Constable under the State Authorities has come up before this Court, seeking the following relief(s):
“a. That the impugned instructions dated 15.07.2017 Annexure A-4 being illegal may very kindly be quashed and set aside.
b. That the respondents may very kindly be directed to grant actual financial benefits to the applicant similar to the persons appointed through same recruitment process and from the same date as has been extended to them as per Annexure A-7 and other consequential benefits.
c. That
Faultless employee denied appointment due to employer's reservation error entitled to full actual monetary benefits from retrospective date; notional condition quashed; deemed regular service counts ....
Post exoneration in disciplinary/criminal proceedings, employee entitled to retrospective promotion with actual monetary benefits from due date, not notional, absent recorded reasons for denial; 'no ....
The principle of 'Equal Pay for Equal Work' was applied, emphasizing that employees holding the same rank performing similar functions and discharging similar duties and responsibilities should be tr....
Homogeneous cadre of Assistant Librarians entitled to uniform pay scales including UGC benefits despite post-new rules regularization, as appointments predated prospective 2010 rules; parity prevents....
The denial of pay scale benefits to petitioners after 18 years of service is unjustified; they are entitled to the pay scale of Sub-Inspector as per M.T. Cadre.
The tribunal affirmed that similar employees' pay should be upgraded equally, addressing violations of equality in pay scales and ensuring equitable treatment among all central government employees.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
