IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 9977 of 2008. Decided on 15th December, 2010. _____________________________________________________ Kuldeep Chand. ….Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : None. For the respondents. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioner’s annual increment was calculated in the month of January every year. However, vide order dated 27.11.2001, it has been unilaterally fixed as June instead of January. The petitioner has suffered civil and evil consequences since his increment has been deferred without hearing him. 2. Consequently, the petition is allowed. The order dated 27.11.2001 is quashed and set aside. In normal circumstances, the respondents ought to have been granted liberty to proceed with the matter in accordance with law, however, since the petitioner was 55 years of age at the time of institution of the petition, i.e., 14.12.2003, the continuation of proceedings will cause immense monetary hardship to the petitioner, therefore, the proceedings are closed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 15, 2010. (bhupender) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - - 3 - `