IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11118 of 2025 Decided on: 11th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Simro Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. B.R. Dhiman, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner’s case is that she retired as regular Peon on 30.04.2025 after rendering regular service of 08 years & 18 days and 04 years & 05 months of service on 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 whole time basis. Petitioner seeks applicability of the decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 and Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to consider her case for grant of benefits claimed by her in light of the aforesaid decisions. 4. It is seen from the record that the petitioner has invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redressal of her grievances raised in the writ petition. 5. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring a representation to the respondents/competent authority within two weeks from today. In case such a representation is so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 3 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 11, 2025 Judge Mukesh