Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Roundup April 8 - April 14, 2024

Suneet Singh Jaryal vs State of HP & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 10

Usha Rani vs State of HP & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 11

UCO Bank & Ors. vs Chaman Singh 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 12

State of H.P. and another vs. Jai Ram Kaundal 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 13

Rakesh Sharma vs. Indian Oil Corporation and another 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 14

Judgments/Orders:

Pensionary Benefits Cannot Be Withheld For An Indeterminate Period On Ground Of Lack Of Resources: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Suneet Singh Jaryal vs State of HP & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 10

A single judge bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Satyen Vaidya while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Suneet Singh Jaryal vs State of HP & Anr held that the state government cannot withhold pensionary benefits for an indefinite period on the pretext of financial constraints.

Family Annual Income Needs To Be Considered For Determining Eligibility Of Anganwadi Workers, Not Individual Annual Income: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Usha Rani vs State of HP & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 11

A single judge bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Ranjan Sharma while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Usha Rani vs State of HP & Ors. held that to determine the eligibility for appointment as Anganwari Workers, the family annual income of the female candidate must be under Rs. 8000 per annum and not the individual annual income of the female candidate.

Service Provided For Period Of Three Months And Above Shall Be Treated As One Half Year For The Purpose Of Calculating Total Service Period: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: UCO Bank & Ors. vs Chaman Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 12

A division bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge, while deciding Letters Patent Appeal in the case of UCO Bank & Ors. vs Chaman Singh held that service provided by an employee for the period of three months and above shall be treated as one half year (6 months) for the purpose of calculating total service period.

Person Appointed Against Scheduled Caste Or Scheduled Tribe Quota, Cannot Later Claim Reservation Under Ex-Serviceman Quota: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title : State of H.P. and another vs. Jai Ram Kaundal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 13

A division bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, and Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, while deciding Letters Patent Appeal held that once a person is appointed against Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe quota, then later they cannot claim reservation under ex-serviceman quota.

Burden Of Proving Employer-Employee Relationship Primarily Rests Upon Who Asserts Its Existence: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Rakesh Sharma vs. Indian Oil Corporation and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 14

A division bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sushil Kukreja, while deciding a Letters Patent Appeal held that the burden of proving the employer-employee relationship primarily rested upon the person who asserted its existence, and once the person asserting to be an employee of the management gives evidence in their favour, then only the burden will shift on the management to give evidence to counter such claims of the employee.