IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.10680 of 2025 Decided on: 07.07.2025 _________________________________________________________________ Kapil Dev . ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Ms. Anchal Singh, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Notice. Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) That respondent May Kindly be Directed to grant the similar benefit of higher stage of Pay as granted by the department in terms of the Judgment passed in CWP 1638 of 2024 titled as Mohit Sharma Vs State of HP. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - ii. That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue the Writ in the nature of mandamus, order or directions directing the Respondents to regularize the services of the Petitioners w.e.f. the date when the Petitioner have completed her two years' service on contract basis i.e. from the date the Regularization Policy was liberalized, along with all consequential benefits, including the benefit of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised pay) Rules, 2022 and the petitioner be accorded the benefit of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised pay) Rules, 2022 after taking into account the services rendered by them on contract basis as having been appointed prior to 03.01.2022, as has been approved by the Cabinet on 14.10.2022. iii). That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue the Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to extend the benefits of the Notifications dated 03.01.2022 & 06.09.2022 and Grant Higher Stage of Pay in the Concerned Level of Pay Matrix i.e. Rs. 37600/- as per Notification dated 06.09.2022 and fix her pay from due date i.e. after completion two years of contractual service with all consequential benefits including the arrears along with interest 9%.” 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 23.03.2025 ( Annexure P-2) , has still not been decided by the - 3 - 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 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 in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. - 4 - Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge July 7, 2025 (R.Atal)