IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8084 of 2022 Decided on: 05.01.2026 Mohan Lal & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 3. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J CMP No. 31342/2025 For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and disposed of. CWP No.8084/2022 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though respondent No.4 has not been served, however, it has no role to play for the reliefs claimed for by the petitioners. The petitioners have claimed the reliefs essentially against respondents No.1 to 3. Learned counsel further submits that the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 name of respondent No.4 be deleted from the array of parties. Accordingly, name of respondent No.4 is ordered to be deleted from the array of parties. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief: - “That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents No.1 & 2 to take over the services of the petitioners as lecturers (School cadre) at par with the similarly placed persons, in the interest of justice.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that relief claimed by the petitioners and the issues involved herein are now covered under Ravi Palsra Versus State of H.P. and others.2, State of H.P. & Ors. Vs. Kamlesh Kumar & Ors.3 and State of H.P. & Ors. Vs. Pooja & Anr.4 Learned counsel submits that the petitioners would be satisfied, in case, respondents are directed to consider the cases of petitioners for the relief claimed for by them in terms of above judgments. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 2 CWP No. 846/2011 decided on 18.09.2012 3 LPA No. 387/2012 decided a/w connected matters on 30.10.2018 4 LPA No. 195/2015 decided on 25.11.2022 3 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the cases of the petitioners in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 5th January 2026(rohit)