IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8816 of 2023 Decided on: 14th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajpal Singh 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. Prantap Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “i. That the respondents may kindly be directed to release/grant the benefits of promotional increments to the petitioners to the post of Head Teachers w.e.f. 01.10.2012 with all consequential benefits, in a time bound manner, as granted in CWP No.2500 of 2021 titled as Ranjeet Singh & others Versus State of H.P. & Others (Annexure P-1).” 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the respective cases of the petitioners and the reliefs prayed for by them are squarely covered in terms of the decision rendered in Ranjit Singh and others Versus State of H.P. and others2. Learned vice counsel also submits that the representations (Annexure P-4) preferred by the petitioners for claiming the above relief are pending consideration with the respondents. Learned vice counsel further submits that the petitioners would be satisfied in case the respondents/ competent authority(s) are directed to decide the aforesaid representations 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 direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Ranjit Singh2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. 2 CWP No.2500 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 07.07.2023 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 14, 2025 Judge Mukesh