IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.14028 of 2024 Decided on: 8th January, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Chhotu Ram ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with 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. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs: - “ i) That the Respondents may kindly be directed to regularise the services of the Petitioner as TGT (Arts) on notional basis on completion of eight years of continuous contractual service on 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - 12/06/2006 w.e.f. 01/01/2007, in view of the judgement delivered by this Hon'ble Court on 10/04/2013 in CWP No.1853 of 2009-D; Titled as Arpana Bali Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and Others, with all consequential benefits. (ii). That the Respondents may further be directed to release the vacation salary of the Petitioner in view of the judgement delivered by this Hon'ble Court on 01/09/2008 in CWP No.415 of 2000; Titled as Baldev Singh Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.” 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redressal of his grievances raised in the writ petition. 4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring representation within two weeks from today. In case such a representation is so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. - 3 - The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge January 8, 2025 R.Atal