IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2976 of 2019 Date of decision: 01.03.2025 Lachhi Ram & Ors. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge CMP-2800 of 2025 Allowed and disposed of. CWP No.2976 of 2019 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “a. That respondent may kindly be directed to grant the scale of 37400-67000+AGP 9000 on completion of 3 years of service in Selection Grade, for which the petitioners are legally and validly entitled or grant the same & similar benefit to the petitioners which has been granted to other Assistant librarian with all subsequent revisions R with 12% interest on the accrued amount 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- along with entire arrears, which has been allowed to their counterparts.” b. That the respondents may also be directed to produce the entire records pertaining to the grant of revision of pay scales & consideration of the cases of the petitioners for grant of such scales.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issued raised in this writ petition and the reliefs prayed for by the petitioners have already been adjudicated upon by this Court. Reliance has been placed upon decision rendered in Laiq Ram Sharma & Anr. vs. State of H.P. & Anr.1. Relevant portion of which reads as under:- “10. Once the petitioners being Assistant Librarians were allowed the benefit of UGC scales, the defence raised on behalf of the respondents, as noticed above, is not justifiable especially in view of Clause 5 (c ) (vi) of the notification dated 15.10.2009 issued by the Higher Education Department of Government of H.P. It is not the case of respondents that the petitioners had not completed three years in pre-revised pay scale of Rs.12000-18300 on 01.01.2006. Even the impugned office order dated 19.06.2018 reveals that on 01.04.1996, the petitioners were granted the Selection Grade Pay Scale of Rs.12000-18300. Thus, they had completed about 10 years in the said scale till 01.01.2006 and as per the above notification, they were entitled to the pay band of Rs.37400-67000 + AGP 9000/-. The respondents had rightly fixed the petitioners in the pay band of Rs.37400-67000+ AGP 9000/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006. 11. Further, the impugned order dated 19.06.2018 does not provide any reasons for deviation from aforesaid order dated 15.10.2009. 12. In result, the impugned office orders dated 19.06.2018 and 22.10.2021 are quashed and set-aside.” The aforesaid judgment was affirmed in LPA No.311 of 2024 (State of H.P. & Anr. vs. Laiq Ram Sharma & 1CWP No.7526 of 2021, decided along with connected matters on 17.10.2023. -3- Anr.) decided along with connected matters with lead case State of H.P. & Anr. vs. Kartar Chand2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are similarly situated to the petitioners in Laiq Ram’s1 case, hence, petitioners would be satisfied, if their cases are considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgments within a time-bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 5. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the respective cases of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgments and pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1st March, 2025 Judge (Pardeep) 2LPA No.356 of 2024 decided along with connected matters on 09.01.2025.