IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10518 of 2025 Decided on: 02nd July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yogesh Sharma …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Naresh Kaul and Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocates. 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 the grant of following substantive reliefs: - “a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus 'or’ any other appropriate writ order or direction may be issued thereby directing the respondents to grant/release the 2nd financial enhancement/up-gradation under the new ACPS (4-9-14) on completion of 09 years of service on the post of TGT (NM) w.e.f. 29.08.2015 along with all consequential benefits to the petitioner, in the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Hon'ble Court in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of H.P and ors. a/w connected matters decided on 01.11.2023 (Annexure P-2), which stands implemented on 12.06.2024 (Annexure P-3), in the interest of law and justice. b) That the respondents may be directed to release the interest @ 9% per annum upon the arrears after granting relief no.(a) supra, in the interest of law and justice. c) That during the pendency of the writ petition the respondents may directed to consider and decide the representation dated 16.02.2025 (Annexure P-4), in view of the judgment passed in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of H.P. & Ors a/w connected matters decided on 01.11.2023 (Annexure P- 2) which stands implemented on 12.06.2024 (Annexure P-3), in the interest of law and justice.” 3. According to the petitioner, the legal issue involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the petitioner is that his representation dated 16.02.2025 (Annexure P-4) has still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority. 4. Once the legal principle involved in the adjudication of present petition has already been decided, it is expected from the welfare State to consider and decide the representation of the aggrieved employee within a reasonable time and not to sit over the same indefinitely compelling the employee to come to the Court for redressal of his grievances. This is also the purport and object of the Litigation Policy of the State. Not taking decision on the representation for months together would not only give rise to unnecessary multiplication of the litigation, but would also bring in 3 otherwise avoidable increase to the Court docket on unproductive government induced litigation. 5. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 16.02.2025 (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also 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 July 02, 2025 Judge rohit