IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7982 of 2025 Decided on: 15th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Aman Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Naresh Kaul and Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocates. 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 the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus 'or’ any other appropriate writ order or direction may be issued thereby directing the respondents to grant/release the 1st financial enhancement/up-gradation under the new ACPS (4-9-14) on completion of 04 years of service on the post of JBT w.e.f. July-August, 2014 & 3rd financial enhancement/up-gradation w.e.f. July-August, 2024 with all consequential benefits to the petitioners, in the 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of H.P and ors.a/w connected matters decided on 01.11.2023 (Annexure P-7), which stands implemented on 12.06.2024 (Annexure P-8), in the interest of law and justice. b) That the respondents may be directed to release the interest @ 9% per annum upon the arrears after granting relief no.(a) supra, in the interest of law and justice. c) That during the pendency of the writ petition the respondents may directed to consider and decide the representation dated 14.09.2024 (Annexure P-9) after taking into consideration Annexure P-7 (01.11.2023) & Annexure P-8 (12.06.2024), in the interest of law and justice.” 3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the petitioners is that their representation dated 14.09.2024 (Annexure P-9) has still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority. 4. Once the legal principle involved in the adjudication of present petition has already been decided, it is expected from the welfare State to consider and decide the representation of the aggrieved employee within a reasonable time and not to sit over the same indefinitely compelling the employee to come to the Court for redressal of his grievances. This is also the purport and object of the Litigation Policy of the State. Not taking decision on the representation for months together would not only give rise to unnecessary multiplication of the litigation, but would 3 also bring in otherwise avoidable increase to the Court docket on unproductive government induced litigation. 5. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioners dated 14.09.2024 (Annexure P-9) in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also 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 May 15, 2025 Judge Mukesh