IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8330/2025 Decided on: 02.06.2025 Kaushalya Thakur …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Rohit, Advocate vice Mr. Davinder Chauhan Jaita, 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. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “ (i) That the petitioner be considered for all benefit of his service in the nature of increment and pensionary benefit for the period under which he has worked as contract employee followed by his regularization from the initial date of appointment. (ii) That, the petitioner be considered for seniority and consequential benefits by counting his entire service especially on contract basis from the initial date of appointment for all benefits in terms of the judgments as annexed herewith this vide SLP (C) No. 13999/2020 and other connected petitions decided on 07.08.2023 by Hon'ble Supreme Court India in case State of H.P. & others Vs. Sheela Devi and CWP No. 2004/2017 alongwith CWP No. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 629/2018 decided on 03.08.2023 titled as Taj mohmad & others. Vs. State of H.P. & others alongwith other connected case.” 3. Learned vice counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has preferred a representation dated 09.09.2023 (Annexure P-2) to the respondent/competent authority, however, no concrete action on her representation has been taken till date. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied, in case, the respondent/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner only for grant of pension in light of decision rendered in State of H.P. & Anr. Vs. Sheela Devi2, in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents has no objection to this prayer. Having regard to the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner for grant of pension in light of law laid down in Sheela Devi2, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from today. 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 2nd June, 2025(rohit) 2SLP(c) No. 10399/2020 decided on 07.08.2023