IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No 9224 & 9226/2025 Decided on: 23.06.2025 1. CWP No.9224/2025 Raj Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 2. CWP No.9226/2025 Daleep Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. I.D. Bali, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Hitesh Bali and J.D. Sharma, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents in all these petitions. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost common substantive reliefs. Relief clause herein is extracted from CWP No. 9224/2025:- “i. the order passed by the Conciliation Officer/Deputy Labour Commissioner H.P. dated 13-01-2025, may be set aside & quashed. ii. the action of respondents giving artificial/fictional breaks to the petitioner from 1997 to 2005 be set aside & quashed. iii. that the service of the petitioner may be counted for regularization from his initial engagement from the year 1997 & the petitioner regularized on 01-01-2006 on completion of 8 years of regular service pursuant to the regularization policy of the Government with all consequential benefits. iv. that the consequential benefits as released to similarly situated persons Mohinder Kumar & Tilak Raj released vide Annexure P-3 & P-4 be also released to petitioner” 3. Petitioners feel aggrieved against the order(s) passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh on different dates declining to refer the dispute raised by the petitioners for adjudication to the learned Labour Court-cum- Industrial Tribunal, on the ground of same being stale, belated and having faded away with time. Beside assailing these orders in question, petitioners seek directions to the respondents to condone/quash alleged artificial/fictional breaks given to them and consequently, to regularize their services on completion of 8 years of regular service. 4. It is not in dispute that the issues raised in these writ petitions, the controversies involved herein and the reliefs claimed 3 have already been adjudicated against the petitioners in Maan Singh Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 Hence, following the ratio of the afore decision, these writ petitions are also dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 23rd June, 2025(rohit) 2 CWP No.9282/2025 a/w connected matters decided on 16.06.2025