IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10842 of 2025 Decided on: 8th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sunny …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Nitin Rishi, 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. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “I. Issue an appropriate writ order or direction to the respondent for extending the benefits of Revised Pay Rules, 2022 by revising the fixed salary of contractual period to minimum of revised pay band Grade Pay along with such hike i.e. Level 10 (Rs.38,100) in view of Judgment passed in CWP No.2056 of 2023 titled as Ghanshyam Dass Versus State of HP & Ors. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 II. 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.30 Trained Graduate Teacher) Rs.38100/- to Rs.41600/- 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. in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has represented to the respondents on 29.06.2025 (Annexure P-7), however, the competent authority has till date not taken any call on the aforesaid representation. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/ competent authority(s) are directed to decide the aforesaid representation 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 aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 29.06.2025 (Annexure P-7) in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 08, 2025 Judge Mukesh