2025:HHC:484 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14916 of 2024 Decided on: 3rd January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thullu Ram and another …..Petitioners Versus H.P. University .....Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Shrutika, Advocate vice Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Devender K. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, 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 an appropriate writ, order or directions may kindly be issued, thereby directing the respondent University to count the contract services rendered by the petitioners for all purposes including the purposes of 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:484 annual increments, leave encashment, pension and seniority and they may kindly be released all the consequential benefits after counting of their contract service from the date of their initial appointment by granting the arrears along with interest @ 9% p.a. in the interest of justice and fair play.” 4. Learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the respective cases of the petitioners and the reliefs 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 vice counsel also submits that the representations dated 11.09.2024 and 05.01.2024 (Annexure P-4) preferred by the petitioners for claiming the above reliefs are pending consideration with the respondent. Learned vice counsel further submits that the petitioners would be content in case the respondent/ competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representations within a fixed time schedule. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is not averse to consider the case of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment, however, all rights and contentions of the parties be left open for decision. 2 CWP No.2004 of 2017, decided alongwith connected matter on 03.08.2023 3 2025:HHC:484 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 respondent/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) 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 03, 2025 Judge Mukesh