IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.960 of 2025 Decided on: 24th March, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sandhya Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Pavinder, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “A) Issue a writ of mandamus or direction in the nature thereof to direct the respondents to grant two due increments in favour of the petitioner in terms of new scheme Annexure P-1 along with all financial benefits from the due date of increment. B) Issue writ of mandamus or direction in the nature thereof to direct the respondents not to make application notification dated 27.0912, affecting the new rights accrued in terms of Assured Carrier Prospects Scheme, with further direction to consider the cases of the petitioner as per letter dated 26.07.21, Annexure P-8.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the reliefs prayed for by 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 her have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Sanjay Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents are directed to examine her case in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Assistant 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 with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Sanjay Kumar2 by passing an appropriate order, within a period of six weeks from today. 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 March 24, 2025 Judge Mukesh 2 CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, decided alongwith connected matters on 01.11.2023