IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10844 of 2025 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 9th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.10844 of 2025 Rajesh Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.10848 of 2025 Satbir Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.10859 of 2025 Deepak Pambra …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. CWP No.10861 of 2025 Vinod Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. CWP No.10862 of 2025 Bandana Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 6. CWP No.10865 of 2025 Manoj Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. CWP No.10866 of 2025 Meena Ram …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. CWP No.10868 of 2025 Shiwani Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Sourav Sharma and Mr. Rocky, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 3 2. All these writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost identical reliefs. The substantive relief in CWP No.10844 of 2025 reads as under:- “a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent department to extend the benefit of revised Pay Rules, 2022 amended on 06.09.2022 by inserting Rule 7-A by granting higher stage of pay for some categories, posts as per schedule-II after completion of two years of regular service by revising the salary (Sr. No.24 JBT) Rs.29700/- to Rs.37600/- as per the judgment dated 29.11.2024 passed in CWP No.1638 of 2024, titled as Mohit Sharma & Anr. V/s State of H.P. & Ors. (Annexure P-4) in the interest of justice.” 3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue involved in these cases has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the petitioners is that their representations dated 25.05.2025, annexed with the respective writ petitions as Annexures P-5 and P-7, have 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 4 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 above, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexures P-5/P-7) in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 09, 2025 Judge Mukesh