IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8139 of 2025 Decided on: 20th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Krishna Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “1. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to grant to the petitioners the benefit of higher stage of pay of Rs.47,000/- from the date the petitioner has completed two years of regular 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 service i.e. 01.07.2017 in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Court in CWP No.4830/2023 titled Inder Singh Thakur & Ors versus State of H.P. & others and further the respondents be directed that the pay of the petitioner be re-fixed w.e.f. 01.07.2017 and the respondents be directed to release to the petitioner all the consequential benefits along with arrears at the rate of 9% per annum. 2. That the respondents may also be directed to release the arrears of pay after re-fixing the pay of the petitioner at Rs.47,000/- w.e.f. the date the petitioner completed two years of regular service i.e. 01.07.2017 along with interest @ 9% per annum.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the relief prayed for by her is squarely covered in terms of the recent decision rendered in Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.2. Learned counsel also submits that the representation dated 21.04.2025 (Annexure P-2) preferred by the petitioner for claiming the above reliefs are pending consideration with respondent No.2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case respondent No.2/ competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/ 2 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025 3 competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 21.04.2025 (Annexure P-2) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Inder Singh Thakur2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 20, 2025 Judge Shasmh Tabrez