IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8380 of 2024 Decided on: 28th March, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mansa Ram …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Munish Datwalia, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant 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. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “A. That the Honble court may kindly direct the respondents to extend the benefit of Judgment dated 7-7-2023 passed in CWP No.2500/2021 in favour of petitioner. B. That your lordship may graciously be pleased to issue the writ in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned action of the respondents, whereby they have been denied the benefits of promotion increment by not invoking the provisions of FR 22 (1)(a)(1) as done with incumbent promoted to the post of Head teacher after 1.10.2012. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 C. That your lordship may further graciously be pleased to issue the writ in nature of mandamus directing the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioner in grade pay with additional promotional increment on account of promotion to HT w.e.f 1.10.2012 with all consequential benefits as has done with the incumbents promoted to the post of head teachers after 1.10.2012 with all consequential benefits @ 9%.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the reliefs prayed for by her have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Ranjit Singh and others Versus State of H.P. and others2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents are directed to examine his case in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Assistant 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 authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Ranjit Singh2 by passing an appropriate order, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2 CWP No.2500 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 07.07.2023 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua March 28, 2025 Judge Mukesh