IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14875 of 2025 Date of Decision: 16.09.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Naresh Sharma & Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Naresh Kaul and Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following main reliefs: “(i) That the respondents may be directed to grant and release the benefits of the promotional increment to the petitioners upon the post of Head Teacher, in view of FR 22 (1)(a)(1) and Rule 11 of the R & P Rules dated 12.08.1987 (Annexure P-1), which carries the higher duties & responsibilities than upon the post of JBT, in the interest of law and justice. b) That a writ, order or direction may be issued and the impugned communication as contained in Annexure P-6 dated 20.04.2022 and the letter dated 25.06.2024 (Annexure P-8) may kindly be quashed, in the interest of law and justice. (c) That during the pendency of the present writ petition the respondents may be directed to consider and decide the representation dated 23.03.2025 in the light of the judgment passed by this Hon’ble Court in CWP No.5545/2022 titled as Gopal Krishan Vs. State of H.P. and ors. on 26.06.2025 (Annexure P-12), in the interest of law and justice.” 2. Before reply could be called for from the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioners states that his clients would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioners in light of judgment dated 26.06.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No. 5545/2022, titled as Gopal Krishan Vs State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., in time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioners. 3. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are directed to consider and decide representation of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioners (Annexure P-10) in light of Gopal Krishan (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within six weeks from 2 today. In case, petitioners are found to be similarly situate to the petitioners in the aforesaid judgment, they would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. September 16, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3