MOHINDER SINGH GULERIA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER joined his duties as Assistant Advocate General on 3rd November, 1981. He was promoted to the post of Deputy Advocate General in the month of October, 1991. He made a detailed representation, which was recommended by the Advocate General to the State Government for granting him the benefit of Rule 30 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules" for brevity sake). The representation made by the petitioner was rejected on 28th July, 1999. Petitioner assailed the order dated 28th July, 1999 before the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by way of Original No.1517 of 2000. On abolition of the Tribunal, the case was transferred to this Court and was assigned CWP(T) 6649 of 2008.

(2.) THE stand of the respondent -State in the reply, precisely is that necessary amendment is required to be carried out in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules to consider the case of the petitioner under Rule -30 of the Rules. Petitioner has relied upon Annexure A -4, dated 31st October, 1990 to allow the benefit of Rule -30, which was granted to similarly situated person, namely, Dr. B.K. Sofat, Professor Ophthalmology.

(3.) MR . Harish Behl, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered under Rule -30 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and he is entitled to get the benefit, which has been given to Dr. B.K. Sofat. He has also argued that the decisions dated 28.07.1999, 06.10.2010 and 23.09.2011 are not in conformity with Rule - 30 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 .