Kamal Kumar vs HPSEB Limited - 2025 Supreme(HP) 1595

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1595

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
G.S.SANDHAWALIA, RANJAN SHARMA
Kamal Kumar – Appellant
Versus
HPSEB Limited – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Nishant Khidtta, Advocate for Mr. V.D. Khidtta, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Ms. Sunita Sharma, Senior Adv. with Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, Adv.

Table of Content
1. lc dismissed claim lacking 240 days proof. (Para 6)
2. writ court granted compensation not reinstatement. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Appellant, Kamal Kumar, being the workman, has come up before this Court assailing the judgment dated 28.09.2018 [Annexure A-1] [referred to as the Impugned Judgment], passed by the Learned Single Judge in CWP No.9722 of 2012 in Re: Kamal Kumar versus HPSEB Limited and another, whereby, the appellant has been granted the relief of monetary compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- [Rupees Two Lakh Only] in lieu of reinstatement with directions to Respondent-Board to disburse compensation within six weeks from date of judgment with interest at the rate of 12% per annum commencing from the expiry of six weeks till realization; with prayer to set-aside the Impugned Judgment and for reinstating the appellant-workman herein, in service with all consequential benefits.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LABOUR COURT AND WRIT COURT:
2. For appreciating the claim in instant Intra-Court Appeal-LPA, the factual matrix detailing the proceedings instituted by the workman herein, before Learned Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal and thereafter before Learn