STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable) Deputy Advocate General vs Keshav Chand(Not Applicable) — CWP/4244/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010167642026

e-Filing Number

30-03-2026

Filing Number

CWP/14459/2026

Filing Date

30-Mar-2026

Registration No

CWP/4244/2026

Registration Date

31-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Coram

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 28-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable) Deputy Advocate General

  2. 2.Divisional FOREST Officer Bilaspur District Bilaspur HP(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Seema Sharma

  3. 3.Divisional Forest Officer, Bilaspur,(Not Applicable)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Keshav Chand(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal DuaView PDF

    Summary The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed three consolidated writ petitions filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh challenging gratuity payment orders issued by the Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in favor of respondents Pawan Kumar, Daulat Ram, and Keshav Chand. The court found the legal issues identical to precedent cases (Binu Ram and Bindumati) and applied the same reasoning to dismiss the petitions, upholding the respondents' right to gratuity payments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Notice Before Admission

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

  4. 30-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/4244/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed three consolidated writ petitions filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh challenging gratuity payment orders issued by the Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in favor of respondents Pawan Kumar, Daulat Ram, and Keshav Chand. The court found the legal issues identical to precedent cases (Binu Ram and Bindumati) and applied the same reasoning to dismiss the petitions, upholding the respondents' right to gratuity payments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case