IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11992 of 2025 Decided on: 25th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pratibha Kumari and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: 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. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “1. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to grant to the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 the benefit of difference of the minimum of the band pay + grade pay paid to them on their 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 appointment on contractual basis and to which they were entitled after the pay revision w.e.f 1.1.2016 till the regularization of their respective services and petitioner Nos.3 to 9 the benefit of difference of the minimum of the band pay + grade pay paid to them on their appointment on contractual basis and to which they were entitled after the pay revision w.e.f their respective appointment on contractual basis till the regularization of their respective services in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Court in CWP No.2056/2023 titled as Ghanshyam Dass & others versus State of H.P & others and further the respondents be directed to release to the petitioners all the consequential benefits along with arrears at the rate of 9% per annum.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have preferred representations dated 12.06.2025 (Annexure P-1 Colly.) to respondent No.2 for claiming the above relief. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be content in case respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representations within a fixed time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners dated 12.06.2025 (Annexure P-1 Colly.) in accordance with law within a 3 period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 25, 2025 Judge Mukesh