+
  • HOME»
  • Himachal Pradesh High Court ordered Attachment Of State Education Secretary’s Salary For Non-Compliance Of 2020 Order

Himachal Pradesh High Court ordered Attachment Of State Education Secretary’s Salary For Non-Compliance Of 2020 Order

The Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case Neel Kamal Singh vs State observed and has ordered for the attachment of the salary of State’s Education Secretary for failure to implement an order passed back in January 2020. The bench comprising of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bipin C. Negi in the case observed and has directed […]

The Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case Neel Kamal Singh vs State observed and has ordered for the attachment of the salary of State’s Education Secretary for failure to implement an order passed back in January 2020.
The bench comprising of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bipin C. Negi in the case observed and has directed that the salary of respondent No.1 the Secretary, the Education to the Government of H.P. be attached till further order.
It has been directed by the Chief Secretary to the Government of H.P. for ensuring the attachment of salary by doing needful within the period of two days Positively.
The court passed the said direction while hearing an execution petition filed by one Neel Kamal Singh, who superannuated from a privately run educational institution that was taken over by the state government.
Further, the plea was filed by the Singh seeking financial benefits, such as gratuity and leave encashment.
The court in the case observed and has earlier ruled in Singh’s favour in January 2020, but the state government had not implemented the order. Therefore, Singh then in the case filed petition in the high court, which ordered the state government to comply with the original order.
The State Government in the case again failed to do so after multiple time extension requests.
The counsel, Senior Additional Advocate General informed the Court that the matter is for consideration before the Secretary.
It has also been stated by the said court that this court is constrained to take coercive measure for ensuring the implementation of order.
Accordingly, the court on the request of learned Senior Additional Advocate General took a lenient view and instead of directing the civil imprisonment or the detention of the concerned Officer, this court is only directing attachment of salary.

Tags:

Advertisement