IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 6964/2022 Decided on: 13.08.2025 Ajay Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J CMP No.19313/2025 For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and disposed of. CWP No. 6964/2022 Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs: - 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 “ i) That the writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued quashing the impugned order dated 09.05.2022 (Annexure P-6). ii) That a Writ in the nature of Mandamus may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to covert the services of the Petitioner on Contract Basis on the post of Assistant Professor (Textile Engineering) in the pay band of 15600-39100+6000 GP in terms of notification dated 03.10.2015 from the due date, i.e. 01.09.2018, along with all consequential benefits. iii) That a Writ in the nature of Mandamus may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to regularize the services of the Petitioner as per the prevailing regularization policy. iv) That a Writ in the nature of Mandamus may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to release the due and admissible arrears in favour of the Petitioner along with 12% interest per annum.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issues involved in this writ petition are no longer res-integra and have been squarely covered by the decisions rendered in Navdeep Sharma Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 and Akshay Sharma Vs. State of H.P.3 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content, if the case of the petitioner is considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgments within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the 2 CWP No. 2266/2020 decided on 03.04.2024 3 CWP No. 8459/2022 decided on 28.08.2024 3 petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgments and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 13th August, 2025(rohit)