IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10798 of 2023 Decided on: 21st June, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arvinder Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath and Mr. Piyush Mehta, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “A. That writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction be issued to respondents directing them to regularize the services of the petitioner on and w.e.f. 01.04.2018 when he completed three years’ service on contract basis, in terms of notification dated 11.05.2018 with all consequential benefits in view of the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court in CWP No-342 of 2021 titled as 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Yashwant Singh and Others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others. B. That writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction be issued to respondents to release all financial benefits such as pay, annual increment etc. w.e.f. 01.04.2018 after having regularized his services in terms of notification dated 11.05.2018 along with interest @ 9% P.A.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the reliefs prayed for by him is squarely covered in terms of the decision rendered in Yashwant Singh and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case he is permitted to prefer a representation to the respondents/competent authority within a period of two weeks and thereafter the competent authority be directed to decide the said representation within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation to the respondents/ competent authority within a period of two weeks from today. In case such a representation is received by the respondents/competent authority within the aforesaid 2 CWP No.342 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 31.08.2022 3 period, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Yashwant Singh2 within a period of six weeks thereafter. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 21, 2025 Judge Mukesh