IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15296 of 2025 Date of decision : 22.09.2025. Dinesh Kumar & Ors. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & another ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral): Notice. Learned Deputy Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to give regularization to the petitioners the benefit of work charge status on completion of 8 years of their respective service alongwith all the consequential benefits. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners are squarely covered by the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- 2025:HHC:33000 ) Civil Appeal No. 1595 of 2025 titled State of H.P. & others vs. Surajmani & another, decided on 26.02.2025. 3. In light of the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already submitted representations to the competent authority and copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure P-1. Since the representations of the petitioners have not been decided, he seeks direction to respondents to decide the same within a time bound manner. 4. Prayer being innocuous is not opposed. 5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of without touching the merits of the case with direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners Annexure P-1 within eight weeks from today. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) 22nd September, 2025 Judge (veena)