IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13619 of 2025 Date of Decision: 25.08.2025 _________________________________________________________ Sanjay Mahajan & others ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Naresh Kaul and Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. _________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following main reliefs:- “i. That the writ in the nature of mandamus ‘or’ any other appropriate writ order ‘or’ direction may be issued thereby directing the respondents to grant/release the 2nd financial enhancement/up-gradation under the new ACPS (4-9-14) on completion of 09 years of service on the post of JBT in the month of January 2014-16 along with all consequential benefits to the petitioners, in the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of H.P and ors. a/w connected matters decided on 01.11.2023 (Annexure P-2), which stands implemented on 12.06.2024 (Annexure P-3), in the interest of law and justice. 2 ii. That the respondents may be directed to release the interest @ 9% per annum upon the arrears after granting relief no.(a) supra, in the interest of law and justice.” 2. Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioners, on instructions, states that petitioners would be content and satisfied in case their representations are considered and decided in the light of judgment passed by Division Bench this Court in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020 titled Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. alongwith connected matters. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that representation, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 4. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, coupled with the fact that petitioners have already filed representation for redressal of their grievance (Annexure P-4), this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners in light of judgment passed by this Court in Sanjay Kumar (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Ordered 3 accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and pass speaking order thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. August 25, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (shankar) Judge