IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.9580 of 2025 Decided on: 16.06 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Leela Devi ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Verma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “i) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents by way of issuance of Writ of Mandamus to consider the petitioner as having been appointed against the post of 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - Computer Operator pursuant to office order dated 19.06.2018 on regular basis for all intents and purposes and further this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari quashing the word 'contract' from the appointment letter Annexure P-2 and granting her regularization from the date of her initial appointment i.e. 19.06.2018. ii) This Hon'ble court may further be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent State to pay to the petitioner all the emoluments as she is entitled at par with regular employees in the establishment of respondent department w.e.f. 19.06.2018 with all consequential benefits such as arrears of pay/salary, seniority, increments etc., alongwith interest @ 9% per annum.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred a representation dated 15.12.2024 (Annexure P-6) to respondent No.2 for claiming the above reliefs. 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. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent - 3 - authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 15.12.2024 (Annexure P-6) in accordance with law 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 Judge June 16, 2025 R.Atal