IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8096 of 2024 Decided on: 9th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tarsem Singh and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Ms. Tara Devi, Advocate vice Ms. Shikha Rajta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “(a) To issue a writ of mandamus, appropriate writ, order or direction in nature thereof, directing the respondent department to treat the petitioners as having been appointed in the year 2002 with all consequential benefits for all purposes and intents.” 3. Learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the relief prayed for by the 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 petitioners and the issues raised by them in the writ petition are squarely covered in terms of the decision rendered in Sh. Milat Ram and others Versus State of H.P. and others2. Learned vice counsel further submitted that the petitioners would be content in case a direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide their respective cases for redressal of the grievances raised in the writ petition in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the respective cases of the petitioners for redressal of their grievances raised in the writ petition, in accordance with law and taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Milat Ram2, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. 2 CWPOA No.6850 of 2020, decided on 10.05.2023 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 09, 2025 Judge Mukesh