IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6967 of 2023 Date of Decision:22.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ Dr. Mohan Lal Sharma & others …….Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioners have prayed for following main relief:- “(i) That the respondents may be directed to consider the petitioners appointees of 1999, when juniors of the petitioners were appointed as Ayurvedic Medical Officers on contract basis on batch wife basis; (ii) That the respondents be directed to count period from 1999 to their date of appointment on contractual basis, as period on service and same may be taken into consideration for regularization, increments and pensionary benefits; (iii) That the respondents be directed to calculate and pay the arrears of salary, pension etc, in a time bound manner.” 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. While referring to the representation(Annexure P-7 colly), learned counsel representing the petitioners states that his clients would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide pending representation, in a time bound manner. 3. While putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide pending representation (Annexure P-7 colly) of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate order. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if they still remain aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 22,2025 (shankar)