IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 5364/2025 Decided on: 09.04.2025 Khem Raj …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Heena Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 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 reliefs:- “a. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, Commanding the Respondents to regularize the Petitioner's services with all consequential benefits, including seniority, continuity of service, and all other benefits arising therefrom, effective from the date of eligibility as per the relevant policies. b. Direct the Respondents to pay the Petitioner any arrears of salary and other financial benefits due from the date he became 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 eligible for regularization, along with interest on such amounts as deemed appropriate by this Hon'ble Court. c. Award costs of this petition and grant any other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, to ensure complete justice for the Petitioner.” 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon Pyare Lal Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2, Neter Singh Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.3, Shiv Kumar Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.4 & Khub Ram Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.5 It is seen from the record that petitioner has directly moved this writ petition without making any representation on the issue to his employer. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, in case, he is permitted to file a representation to respondent No.2/competent authority, whereafter the said respondent be directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within time bound schedule and in accordance with the aforesaid judgments. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 5. Having regard to above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make a representation to respondent No.2/competent authority, within a period of two weeks from today, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with 2CWP No.1529/2020 decided on 08.08.2023 3CWP No. 9085/2023 decided on 21.11.2024 4CWP No.774/2024 a/w connected matter decided on 27.02.2025 5CWP No. 9086/2023 decided on 13.03.2025 3 law and keeping in view the aforesaid judgments, within a further period of six weeks. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 09th April 2025(rohit)