IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14030 of 2024 Decided on: 6th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Devinder Nath and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Nikhil, Advocate vice Mr. Mandeep Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional 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. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “i) That the respondent may kindly be directed to count the entire service of the petitioners, including initial service on contract basis, followed by regularization towards 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 seniority along with all consequential benefits being a covered matter by the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court vide judgment dated 03-08-2023 (Annexure-P-3) in C.W.P. No.2004/2017 a/w C.W.P. No.629/2018 upholding the judgment dated 25-05-2017 passed by the erstwhile Ld. H.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.3337/2016 whereby the service rendered by the employees concerned on contract basis has been ordered to be counted for the purpose of seniority along with consequential benefits and the respondent department is under legal duty to count the contract services of the petitioners for the purpose of annual increments." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respective cases of the petitioners and the relief prayed for by them have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Sh. Taj Mohammad and others Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others2. Learned counsel also submits that the representations (Annexure P-5 Colly) preferred by the petitioners for claiming the above reliefs are pending consideration with the respondents. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representations within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the respondents are not averse to consider the case of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment, however, 2 CWP No.2004 of 2017, decided alongwith connected matter on 03.08.2023 3 all rights and contentions of the parties be left open for decision. 5. 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 representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-5 Colly.) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Taj Mohammad2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. It is clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties are left open. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 06, 2025 Judge Mukesh