IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9442 of 2023 Decided on: 8th April, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pawan Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, 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. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “a) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents by way of issuance of Writ of Mandamus to consider the petitioner as having been appointed against the post of TGT (Arts) pursuant to office order dated 11.08.2011 on regular basis for all intents and purpose alongwith all consequential benefits and further this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the word ‘contract’ from the appointment letter dated 11.08.2011 (Annexure P-2), issued to the petitioner on contract basis. b) This Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent State to pay 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 to the petitioner all the emoluments as he is entitled as a regular employee of the respondents department alongwith interest @ 18% w.e.f. the initial date of appointment of the petitioner alongwith all consequential benefits.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the reliefs prayed for by him have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Umesh Jaswal Versus State of H.P. & others2. Learned counsel also submits that the representation dated 13.10.2023 (Annexure P-4) preferred by the petitioner for claiming the above reliefs is pending consideration with the respondents. 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 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 aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 13.10.2023 (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking 2 CWP No.5090 of 2022, decided alongwith connected matters on 19.12.2022 3 into consideration the above judgment in the case of Umesh Jaswal2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua April 08, 2025 Judge Mukesh