HANS RAJ Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application received by one of us (Chief Justice) was registered as a writ petition. The application was made by a retired employee of the State Government who was at the time of his retirement working in the office of Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Hamirpur in the capacity of a clerk.

(2.) On April 28, 1969, the petitioner was placed under suspension. The services of the petitioner were terminated on Feb. 3, 1971. The order of termination was challenged in Civil Writ Petition No.61 of 1971 : Reported in ILR (1974) Him Pra 296 which was decided in favour of the petitioner on Mar. 15, 1974 by a teamed single Judge of this Court by quashing the termination order and giving a further direction to the effect that "the petitioner shall be deemed to have continued in service right from the date the impugned order was passed" and that "he shall also be entitled to all consequential benefits arising as a result of the quashing of the order."

(3.) The decision of the learned single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No.61 of 1971 was made the subject matter of Letters Patent Appeal No.15 of 1974, which was preferred on April 25, 1974. An application for stay of the decision of the learned single Judge, being C.M.P. No.519 of 1974, was instituted on June 6, 1974. It is the petitioner's case that meanwhile he submitted his joining report on May 16, 1974 in the office of Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Hamirpur, but he was not permitted to join duty. At an earlier stage in the course of this proceeding this fact appears to have been in dispute. It is, however, conceded now that the petitioner had furnished the joining report on May 16, 1974, as alleged by him, and that it was forwarded to the second respondent (Director of Consolidation, Himachal Pradesh, Simla). It is the case of the petitioner that he was thus prevented from joining duly, although, as a result of the decision in Civil Writ Petition No.61 of 1971, he was entitled to join duty and the operation and implementation of the said decision was not stayed at the relevant time. On the stay application preferred in the Letters Patent Appeal (C.M.P. No.519 of 1974) an order was made on Oct. 11, 1974. The material portion of the said order reads as under : -