IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14922 of 2025 Decided on: 16th September, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dinesh Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that this writ petition be treated to have been filed only by petitioners No.4 to 7, 14, 16, 20 and 22, who belong to District Chamba. That the remaining petitioners be permitted to file separate petitions for the redressal of their grievances raised in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly treated to have been filed on behalf of petitioners No.4 to 7, 14, 16, 20 and 22. Remaining petitioners are at liberty to file separate 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 petitions for the redressal of their grievances raised in this writ petition. Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, 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. Petitioners No.4 to 7, 14, 16, 20 and 22 are serving in the respondent-Horticulture Department and have prayed for direction to the respondents to grant them work charge status from the date they completed eight years of service with all incidental benefits. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved in the writ petition and the relief prayed for by petitioners No.4 to 7, 14, 16, 20 and 22 are now covered by the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.2. The respondent-Department was also the appellant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in some of the connected matters. Learned counsel also submits that the representations dated 04.08.2025 (Annexure P-1 Colly.) preferred by petitioners No.4 to 7, 14, 16, 20 and 22 for claiming the relief are pending consideration with the 2 Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025 3 respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be satisfied in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to decide the aforesaid representations within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of petitioners No.4 to 7, 14, 16, 20 and 22 dated 04.08.2025 (Annexure P-1 Colly.) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Surajmani2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 16, 2025 Judge Mukesh