IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP Nos.9278 & 9302 of 2025 Decided on: 4th June 2025 _________________________________________________________________ 1. CWP No. 9278 of 2025 Pritam Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents. ______________________________________________________ 2. CWP No. 9302 of 2025 Tej Singh ..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents. ______________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Arun Rana, Advocate. 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 in both the matters. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - 2. These writ petitions have been filed for grant of almost common reliefs, which have been extracted from CWP No. 9278 of 2025: - “ i) That the respondent department may kindly be ordered to grant work charge status to the petitioner, on competition of 8 years service, as per the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex court in Civil appeal No. 1595of 2025 tilted as The state of H.P. versus Surajmani & Another. ii. To grant benefit of refixation of pay of the petitioner with effect from 08-04-2002 with all consequential benefits as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice and fair play..” 3. Admittedly, the petitioners have invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation(s) to the competent authority for the redressal of grievances raised in the writ petitions. 4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be preferring representations within two weeks from today. In case such representations are so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law, in light of decision rendered in State of HP and others Versus - 3 - Surajmani and Anr.2 within a period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge June 4, 2025 R.Atal 2 LPA No.165 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 12.01.2023