2025:HHC:31095 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 14713 of 2025 Decided on: September 11, 2025 ______________________________________________________________ Gian Chand and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. P.C. Verma, Mr. Aakash Thakur and Mr. Varun Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C. Verma and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. By way of present petition, the petitioners have prayed for following main reliefs: “A) That the respondents may be directed to review the cases of the petitioners also as per the Judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court on 7.4.2025 with all consequential benefits. B) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners for promotion to the posts of Group Instructors in accordance with “the Himachal Pradesh, Technical Education Vocational and Industrial Training Department, Group Instructors Class-III (Non-Gazette) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2017” Annexure P-1, w.e.f. from the due date i..e 4.7.2017 when the - 2 - Rules were finalized and posts were vacant alongwith all consequential benefits of arrears of pay and allowances and further promotion, in the interest of justice. ” 2. Notice. 3. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 4. Before reply, if any, could be called from the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioners invited attention of this Court to judgment dated 7.4.2025 passed by this Court in Jitender Singh Rangta and Ors. . v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr., CWP no. 3993 of 2021, and connected matter, to state that the issue raised in the present petition stands decided in Jitender Singh Rangta supra, as such, petitioners shall be content and satisfied in case a direction is issued to the respondents to decide their case in light of Jitender Singh Rangta supra, in a time bound manner. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General is not opposed to the afore innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners. 6. Having carefully perused the contents of petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, especially the relief clause vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the present petition stands adjudicated by this Court in Jitender Singh Rangta supra. - 3 - 7. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of petitioner, within a period of six weeks from today, in light of Jitender Singh Rangta supra as well as rules occupying the field, at the relevant time. Needless to say, authority concerned, shall afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a speaking order thereafter. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if they still remain aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 11, 2025 (Vikrant)