The High Court clarified that once all admissible pension arrears are released and the petitioner’s grievance is redressed, the writ petition is rendered infructuous and stands disposed of; this affirms existing precedent and offers binding value in pension-related litigation for subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWP/8064/2025 of HARI SINGH Vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS |
| CNR | HPHC010205902025 |
| Date of Registration | 15-05-2025 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA |
| Court | High Court of Himachal Pradesh |
| Bench | Single Bench |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within jurisdiction |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms existing principles of mootness in writ petitions |
| Type of Law | Service Law, Pension Law |
| Questions of Law | Whether a writ petition becomes infructuous once the relief sought has been granted |
| Ratio Decidendi |
Where a writ petitioner’s grievance is addressed by subsequent compliance from respondents—here, pension arrears released as per the Pension Payment Order—no further cause of action survives, and the writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous. This upholds the principle that courts do not adjudicate academic or moot grievances. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Admissible pension arrears were released to the petitioner following clarification obtained during writ proceedings; both sides admitted that no grievance survived. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts considering mootness of service-related writs |
| Follows | Settlement and redressal jurisprudence in pension/service disputes |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Expressly affirms the principle that redressal of the petitioner’s primary grievance (release of pension arrears) renders the writ petition infructuous.
- Lawyers should ensure to submit up-to-date compliance reports before hearings in writs involving pension or service arrears, as the case may be disposed of on redressal.
- The admission by both sides regarding resolution of the dispute leads to disposal without adjudication on merits.
- No costs or adverse orders are likely in similar cases where prompt compliance is shown.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted a clarification from the respondents (State and authorities) that, as per the Pension Payment Order (PPO), the petitioner’s pension commenced on 01.04.2023.
- It was recorded that all admissible arrears had been released under an official order dated 08.10.2025.
- Petitioner’s counsel admitted full satisfaction concerning the release of arrears.
- On this admitted position, the court found no surviving grievance and held the writ petition to be infructuous.
- The case was disposed of without a substantive merits hearing, in accordance with established practice where relief has been fully granted.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Acknowledged and admitted that all admissible arrears had been released as per the PPO and office order.
Respondents (State and Others):
- Informed the court that the date of commencement of pension was 01.04.2023, as per PPO.
- Affirmed that all pension arrears due to the petitioner were released.
Factual Background
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking release of admissible pension arrears. During the proceedings, the respondents clarified—by reference to the Pension Payment Order—that the petitioner’s pension commenced on 01.04.2023 and all admissible arrears were released under office order dated 08.10.2025. Both parties agreed that the petitioner’s grievance stood redressed.
Statutory Analysis
- Reference was made to the Pension Payment Order prescribing the date of pension commencement.
- The judgment implicitly follows the administrative law doctrine that courts stand down once the lis (dispute) is fully redressed, but no specific statutes were discussed at length.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions were delivered. Judgment was by a single judge.
Procedural Innovations
- The court disposed of the writ petition on the basis of mutual admission regarding the redressal of the petitioner’s grievance, demonstrating efficiency in procedural handling of infructuous or moot petitions.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing law and practice concerning infructuous writ petitions and mootness was affirmed.