IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10016 of 2023 Decided on: 29th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meena Verma …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “a) That the writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner from the initial appointment when she was appointed on contract basis i.e. Annexure P-4 dated 1.9.2018. b) That the respondents kindly be directed to grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner same as has been granted to other similar situated persons as per the judgment supra and thereafter fresh senior list may kindly be prepared.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in this writ petition and the reliefs claimed 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 by the petitioner have already been adjudicated upon in Union of India Vs. National Federation of the Blinds & Others2; Union of India and Others Vs. National Confederation for Development of Disabled & Another3; Nitin Kumar Vs. State of H.P. & Anr.4; and Umesh Jaswal Versus State of H.P. & others5. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to consider her case in light of the aforesaid judgments and decide the same within a fixed time schedule. Learned Deputy 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 case of the petitioner in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments by passing an appropriate order, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2 2013 (10) SCC 722 3 SLP(C) No.13344/2014, decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 12.09.2014 4 CWPOA No.1077/2019, decided on 22.08.2022 5 CWP No.5090 of 2022, decided alongwith connected matters on 19.12.2022 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 29, 2025 Judge Mukesh