IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.9924of 2025 Decided on: 20th June 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Rajesh Kumar ....Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ankit Dhiman, 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. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant following substantive reliefs: “(A) That the Petitioner may be granted benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme from the dates, when they completed 14 years of service in the cadre from the dates of their appointments with all consequential benefits and benefits in relation to gratuity, pension, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - leave encashment, as also revised pension based on the scale as would be granted to the petitioner upon completion with all consequential benefits. (B) That since the judgments passed by this Hon'ble Court in LPA No. 706 of 2011 titled State of H.P. & ors. Vs Dr. (Mrs.) Madhuri Dhadwal dated 03.07.2012 and in CWP No.4481 of 2020 titled as Dr. Sunil Sharma & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh vide dated 25.04.2024 In Sanjay Kumar Vs State Of H.P. & Other Connected matters in CWPOA NO. 5536 of 2020 interpreting the Assured Career Progression Scheme has attained finality; thus, the respondents may be directed to grant the above benefit within a time bound schedule along-with interest and consequential revised pay scale within a time bound schedule and pay arrears to the Petitioner along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum..” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that representation of the petitioner preferred by him has not been considered and decided by the respondents/competent authority till date. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be content, in case, he is permitted to submit fresh comprehensive representation to the respondents/ Competent Authority seeking the relief prayed for by him in the writ petition, whereafter, respondents /Competent Authority, be directed to decide the representation to be made by him, in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate - 3 - General has no objection to this prayer. 4. In view of above submissions, the present petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make fresh comprehensive representation to the respondents /Competent Authority, within a period of two weeks from today, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within a further period of six weeks by passing order, which shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge June 20, 2025 R.Atal