Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13907 (HP)

RAJESH KUMAR AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/7747/2025 · 2025-05-09

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7747 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.05.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Rajesh Kumar & Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Mr. Anshul Jairath & Mr. Piyush Mehta, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents-State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following main reliefs: “(i) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue the Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to extend the benefits of the Notifications dated 03.01.2022 & 06.09.2022 and Grant Higher Stage of Pay in the Concerned Level of Pay Matrix i.e. Rs. 37600/- as per Notification dated 06.09.2022 w.e.f. 06.09.2022 and fix their pay from due date i.e. after completion of two years of regular service alongwith all consequential benefits including the arrears along with interest @ 9%. (ii) That the cost of the Writ Petition may be granted in favour of the Petitioners and against the respondents.” 2. Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioners, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment passed by Coordinate Bench this Court in CWP No. 1638 of 2024 titled Mohit Sharma & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Coordinate Bench this Court in Mohit Sharma (supra) and as such, petitioners would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and representations, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) in light of Mohit Sharma (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an 2 opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and pass speaking order thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. May 09, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3