IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.9900 of 2025 Decided on: 26.05.2025 _________________________________________________________________ Meera Devi & Ors …..Petitioners Versus State of HP & Ors …..Respondents. ______________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. R.L.Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs: - i). That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent department to grant pay scale of TGT (Arts) to the petitioners from the due dates i.e. 01.04.2018, 13.01.2022 and 27.10.2010 respectively with all consequential benefits in view of the notification dated 17.12.1991 (Annexure P- 6) & 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - Notification dated 20.06.2003 (Annexure P-7) issued by the State Government. ii. That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent department to extend the benefit of promotion to Petitioner No. 1 & 3 to the post of Lecturer (School New) or Headmaster from the due date i.e. 2023 & 2015 with all consequential benefits.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the relief prayed for and the legal issue involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon in Subhash Chand and another Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others2 and Hem Raj Vs. State of H.P. and others3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that petitioners would be satisfied in case they are permitted to make representation(s) to the respondents /Competent Authority for the redressal of their grievances, whereafter, respondents /Competent Authority be directed to consider their representation(s) within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection for the same. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioners to 2 CWP(T) No. 5759 of 2008, decided on 05.07.2010 3 CWP No. 2171 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matters on 04.09.2023 - 3 - prefer representation(s) to respondents /Competent Authority within two week, the same shall be considered and decided by the Competent Authority, in accordance with law, keeping in view decision rendered in Subhash Chand2 and Hem Raj3, within a period of six weeks thereafter. Copy of decision so taken, 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 June 26, 2025 R.Atal