IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 6882/2025 a/w connected matters Decided on: 30.04.2025 1. CWP No. 6882/2025 Ashok Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 2. CWP No. 6884/2025 Surinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 3. CWP No. 6886/2025 Ravi Dutt Bhardwaj …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 4. CWP No. 6888/2025 Banti Sharma …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 5. CWP No. 6890/2025 Shashi Kant …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 6. CWP No. 6892/2025 Karmate …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 7. CWP No. 6894/2025 Ashok Kumar …Petitioner Versus 2 State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 8. CWP No. 6896/2025 Surinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 9. CWP No. 6924/2025 Gurcharan …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Dixit Sahotra, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 & 2 in all the petitions. Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.3 & 4 in all the petitions. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. Y.P.S Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Deepak Sharma, learned counsel, accept notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2 and 3 & 4, respectively. 2. These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost common substantive reliefs. Relief clause herein is extracted from CWP No. 6882/2025:- 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 3 “Issue a Writ of Mandamus, appropriate writ, order or direction in nature thereof, directing the repondents to regularize the petitioner's service w.e.f. 21.10.2019, i.e., the date on which the petitioner has completed his three years of service on the said post with all consequential benefits and pay arrears to the petitioner along with interest @18%.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that respective representations of the petitioner(s) preferred by them, have not been considered and decided by respondent No.3/competent authority till date. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner(s) would be content, in case, they are permitted to submit a fresh comprehensive representation(s) to the aforesaid respondent/competent authority seeking the relief prayed for by them in the writ petitions, whereafter, respondent No.3/competent authority, be directed to decide the representations to be made by them, in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 3. In view of above submissions, the present petitions are disposed of by permitting the petitioner(s) to make fresh comprehensive representations to respondent No.3/competent authority, within a period of two weeks from today, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law and applicable Transfer Policy, within a further period of six weeks by passing a reasoned order, which shall also be communicated to the 4 petitioner(s). Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 30th April, 2025(rohit)