IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10720/2023 Decided on: 07.07.2025 Chet Ram & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Even though no reply has been filed, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. The 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 petitioners as having been appointed against the post of Drawing Master 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 (Annexure P-2 (Colly), issued to the petitioner on contract basis. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 (b) This Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent State to pay to the petitioners all the emoluments as they are entitled as a regular employees in the establishment of respondents alongwith with 18% interest w.e.f. Petitioners’ date of appointment with all consequential benefits including counting the period for the purpose of seniority etc.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have preferred their respective representations dated 13.10.2023 [Annexure P-4 (colly)], which have still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners would be satisfied, in case, they are permitted to submit fresh representations to respondent No.2/competent authority, pointing out therein the decisions upon which they are relying for grant of reliefs from the respondents/competent authority and the same be directed to be decided by the respondents/competent authority in a time bound manner. Prayer is not opposed by learned Deputy Advocate General. 4. Taking into consideration the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioners to make fresh representations to respondent No.2/competent authority, within a period of two weeks from today, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law within a further period of six weeks. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the 3 petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 07th July, 2025(rohit)