IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 13692 of 2025 Date of decision : 26.8.2025. Ramnesh Kumar & others ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, Addl. A.G. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral): Notice. Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, learned Addl. Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed for following substantive relief:- “a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus 'or' new any other appropriate writ order 'or' direction may be issued thereby directing the respondents to grant/release the 3rd financial enhancement/up-gradation under the ACPS(4-9- 14) on completion of their 14 years of service on the same post alongwith all consequential benefits, to the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- 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. b) 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. c) That during the pendency of the writ petition the respondents may directed to consider and decide the representation dated 03.08.2025 (Annexure P-4), in view of the judgment passed in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar vs. State of H.P. & 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.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the issue arising in the instant petition has already been settled by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 01.11.2023 passed in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020 titled as Sanjay Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others along with connected matters. He submits that the petitioners have already made a representation to the competent authority and he will be satisfied, at this stage, in case the competent authority i.e. respondent No.2 is directed to -3- decide the representation of the petitioners in a time bound manner, in terms of judgment in Sanjay Kumar (supra). 4. The prayer being innocuous is allowed. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners Annexure P-4 within a period of eight weeks from today by passing a detailed and reasoned order, strictly in terms of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020 titled as Sanjay Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others along with connected matters. Needless to say, in case the petitioners are found similarly situated to the petitioner in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, they shall be given all the benefits as have been granted to the petitioner in CWPOA No.5536 of 2020 within a further period of four weeks. 5. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending applications, if any. (Satyen Vaidya) 26th August, 2024 Judge (kck)