CWP(T) No. 3239/08 (OA 1796/05) 20.3.2009 Present: Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondent No. 1 and 2. Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. The present petition has become infructuous as stated by Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petition is dismissed as such. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No.3396/08(OA No. 1024/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Mr. K.B. Khajuria, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to subsequent developments the present petition has become infructuous. The petition is dismissed as such. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3747/08 (OA No. 1240/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Vikrant Thakur, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondent. To enable Mr. Vikrant Thakur, learned vice counsel for the petitioner to complete his instructions, list the matter on 27th March, 2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3054/2008 (OA No. 420/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. H.K. Paul, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. List on 23.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3201/2008 (OA No. 916/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mrs. R. Parmar, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Mrs. Ranjana Parmar submits that the present petition has become infructuous. Disposed of as such. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Y.K. Thakur, vice counsel for the appellant. Mr. Janesh Gupta, counsel for respondent No. 1. CMP(M) No. 974 of 2008 Reply not filed. For the reasons set out in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the delay of 15 days for filing the appeal is condoned. Disposed of. FAO No. 560 of 2008 The parties jointly prayed that keeping in view the facts and circumstances the present appeal be heard at the stage of admission. Accordingly list the matter in June, 2009. Let notice be issued to respondent No. 2. Steps be taken within three days, positively. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) FAO No. 171 of 1992 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. D. Dadwal, counsel for the appellant. Let notice be issued to non-applicants being original respondents No. 4 to 12. Registry may handover the dasti summons to the learned counsel for the appellant returnable within three weeks. Steps be taken within three days, positively. In the meanwhile, the appearing respondents may file the reply. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 4199/2008 (OA No. 323/97) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. A.K. Gupta, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Heard in part. For continuation, list on 23.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 4194/2008 (OA No. 2981/97) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. H.K. Paul, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Dilip Sharma, counsel for respondents No. 3 to 9, 11 and 12. Mr. Arun Kumar, vice counsel for respondent No. 10. Mr. H.K. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to subsequent development, which has taken place, the present petition has become infructuous. Disposed of as such. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 4157/2008 (OA No. 79/1997) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Naresh Thakur, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Let the rejoinder to the reply be filed within two weeks. List on 10.4.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 4156/2008 (OA No. 75/97) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Vikrant Thakur, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondent No. 1. Mr. Subhash Sharma, counsel for respondent No. 2. Both the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 have since retired. With the passage of time, the present petition has become infructuous. Disposed of as such. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 4084/2008 (OA(M) No. 177/97) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 23.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3659/2008 (OA(D) No. 40/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondent. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3662/2008 (OA(D) No. 52/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. List on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3852/2008 (OA No.1683/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Let the record be produced. List on 17.4.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3634/2008 (OA(M) 403/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 23.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3627/2008 (OA(M) 280/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 23.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3178/2008 (OA 822/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Rajnish Maniktala, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. H.K. Paul, counsel for respondent No. 3. To enable Mr. Maniktala, learned counsel for the petitioners to prepare the matter, list on 24.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3163/2008 (OA 766/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Dilip Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Mr. Dilip Sharma submits that registered AD letter sent to his client has been returned back with the remarks “incomplete address”. He will again send another registered letter to his client to complete his instructions. List after three weeks. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3992/2008 (OA No. 1236/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Arun Kumar, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Anjula Khajuria, , vice counsel for respondent No. 1. Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma, counsel for respondent No. 2. List on 26.3.2009 as Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 is stated to be out of station. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3993/2008 (OA No. 1237/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Arun Kumar, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Anjula Khajuria, , vice counsel for respondent No. 1. Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma, counsel for respondent No. 2. List on 26.3.2009 as Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 is stated to be out of station. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 2978/2008 (OA No. 112/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Vikrant Thakur, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Learned vice counsel for the petitioner submits that they have instructions not to press the present petition. Dismissed as such. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3146/2008 (OA No. 721/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Raknish Maniktala, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thaku, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Order dated 5th of March, 2009 has not been complied with. Mr. Vivek Thakur, learned Additional A.G., however, submits that he had filed an application seeking extension of time to comply with the order. The said application is not on record. Be that as it may be, time to comply with the order dated 5th of March, 2009 is further extended upto 31.3.2009. It is clarified that if the affidavit is not filed on that date, the Secretary (Rural Development) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh shall be personally present in the Court alongwith the relevant record. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 2989/2008 (OA No. 179/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. Lokender Thakur, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Umesh Kanwar, vice counsel for respondents No. 3 and 4. Mr. Lokender Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that due to subsequent developments the present petition has become infructuous. Disposed of as such. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3087/2008 (OA No. 524/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. The petitioner is seeking regularization of his services as Mason w.e.f. 1st of January 1994, with all consequential benefits. The respondents in their reply have disputed the fact that the petitioner has been working as Mason w.e.f. 1.1.1994. Record, however, reveals that since January 1983 the petitioner had been working as Beldar with a gap of few months in June and July 1984 when he worked as Mason. From the details of the Muster-rolls. as so reflected in the reply, it is evident that at least since 1990 he has been working as Mason upto 1993. The prayer of the petitioner as such cannot be accepted. Undisputedly, it is the policy of the State Government to regularize such persons who had uninterruptedly continued to have worked on the same post for a period of ten years and it cannot be disputed that the said policy would be applicable to the petitioner as he has been working as Mason since 1990 onwards. In this view of the matter, it is directed that if the petitioner fulfill the policy condition as also the ratio of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya’s case work charge status shall be offered to him with all consequential benefits in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 4198/2008 (OA No. 318/97) 20.3.2009 Present: Mr. A.L. Gupta, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Anjula Khajuria, counsel for respondents. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “That the respondents may be directed to pay the open medical allowance to the applicant with retrospective effect with all the benefits incidental thereof such as arrears etc.” The petitioner sought pre-mature retirement from the post of Circle Head Draftsman in the H.P.S.E.B. Project Construction Circle, Bhuntar, District Kullu w.e.f. 1.7.1987. For the grant of pension, certain option with regard to the medical allowance is stated to have been furnished to the authorities. As per the petitioner he opted for open medical allowance and option was accepted which is apparent from the fact that w.e.f. January 1989 upto 1993 he was treated in the category of open medical allowance. But, however, the same was abruptly stopped. It is this action which he has assailed in the present petition. The respondents in their reply have stated that even during the period of his service, the petitioner have been received fixed medical allowance upto the date of his retirement. The reimbursement medical bills in the open medical allowance category was wrongly paid and the mistake was rectified and the amount recovered from him. Mr. Gupta has fairly stated that there is nothing on record to prove that the petitioner had in fact opted for the open medical allowance category. On the contrary, CWP(T) No. 4198/2008 (OA No. 318/97) the respondents have placed on record several documents including letter dated 30th of November 1992 from which it is evident that the petitioner was entitled to only fixed medical allowance. In this view of the matter, no legally enforceable right of the petitioner stands violated. The petition being devoid of merit is dismissed. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3666/2008 (OA(D) No. 63/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3668/2008 (OA(D) No. 75/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3704/2008 (OA(D) No.239/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. Lokinder Thakur, counsel for respondents List on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3653/2008 (OA(D) No. 23/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondent No. 2. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3662/2008 (OA(D)No.52/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3635/2008 (OA(M)No.414/96) 20.3.2009 Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Inspite of pass over, none has caused appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In the interest of justice, list the matter on 23.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3915/2008 (OA No. 1883/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Ms. Sunita Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. D.K. Khanna, counsel for respondent No. 3. Mr. A.K. Sharma, counsel for respondent No. 4. List on 26.3.2009 to enable Miss Sunita Sharma to prepare the matter. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs) CWP(T) No. 3852/2008 (OA No. 1683/96) 20.3.2009 Present: Mrs. RaNone for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. List on 26.3.2009. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 20, 2009 (vs)